9 Apr
2003
9 Apr
'03
9 p.m.
Any comments on this?
-Maxim
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 07:41:55PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
Yet another obstacle on the way of proper INVITE-ACK
matching for
negative replies: some UA might pick up Via parameters from
provisional responses and then copy them into ACK. For example
ATA-186 does this with received/rport parameters, so that
they don't match with ones from INVITE:
(gdb) print t_msg->via1->name
$18 = {
s = 0x282ed926 "SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.20:5060\r\nFrom:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72;user=phone>
;tag=3473403119\r\nTo: <sip:122@64.180.102.72;user=phone>\r\nCall-ID:
3487919719(a)192.168.1.20\r\nCSe
q: 2 INVITE\r\nContact: <sip"..., len = 3}
(gdb) print p_msg->orig
$19 = 0x80d51f8 "ACK sip:122@64.180.102.72;user=phone SIP/2.0\r\nVia: SIP/2.0/UDP
192.168.1.20:5060;
rport=5060;received=193.111.9.226\r\nFrom:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=347340311
9\r\nTo: <sip:122@64.18"...
As you can see, in the INVITE we had 1st Via:
SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.20:5060
While in the ACK:
SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.20:5060;rport=5060;received=193.111.9.226
Needs to be corrected as well.
-Maxim
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 07:26:54PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
Not only that, but there is also a bug which
causes match failure
due to extra space in the ACK, see the gdb session below:
0x2a17b904 in t_lookup_request (p_msg=0x80d4c88, leave_new_locked=1) at t_lookup.c:268
268 {int b=1; while (b);}
(gdb) s b=0
(gdb) n
270 if (!EQ_LEN(callid)) continue;
(gdb) print t_msg->callid->body
$8 = {
s = 0x282ed9b8 "3650497277(a)192.168.1.20\r\nCSeqnCSeq: 2 INVITE\r\nContact:
<sip:380442466396@192.168.1.
20:5060;user=phone;transport=udp>\r\nUser-Agent: Cisco ATA 186 v2.15 ata18x
(030401b)\r\nAuthorizat
ion: Digest username=\"3804"..., len = 23}
(gdb) print p_msg->callid->body
$9 = {s = 0x80bdf73 " 3650497277(a)192.168.1.20\r"quot;, len = 24}
As you can see, the callid is the same, but EQ_LEN(callid) will be
false, due to the fact that p_msg->callid->body.len !=
t_msg->callid->body.len.
-Maxim
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 05:56:17PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers Sorry, further investigation shown that this
particular problem was
caused by the typo in our fix for hashing function (one found in 0.8.10
didn't bother to strip insignificant chars from call-id and cseq number).
I've fixed that and the problem gone.
However, we have another problem with ACK matching. The problem is that
we are using propiertary module which queries billing engine via Radius
and uses its replies to rewrite URI. Since it isn't practical to run
that query on each request received, we are only performing it on
INVITEs, which is fine as long as the next hop is always B2BUA that
only cares about method URI in INVITE requests and ignores it in any
subsequent requests. The typical sequence looks like the following:
1. ATA->SER:
INVITE xyz(a)foo.bar
2. SER->BILLING
please expand xyz
3. BILLING->SER
xyz expands to 123456
4. SER->B2BUA (t_relay_to())
INVITE 123456(a)foo.bar
Everything is fine when INVITE transaction ends with a 200 OK, in this
case ATA generates ACK to acknowelege 200 OK using information from
that 200 OK, i.e. `ACK 123456(a)foo.bar'#39;, not `ACK xyz(a)foo.bar'#39;. The problem
happens if transaction ends with 4xx error, or is cancelled by the
originating party, in this case ATA acknoweleges receipt of final negative
response with `ACK xyz(a)foo.bar' so that tm module is unable to match ACK
to original INVITE.
Do you have any ideas how to properly solve this problem without
introducing steps (2) and (3) above for every ACK request as well?
It would be inacceptable for us since each BILLING query means
extra database access, therefore is puting extra load on the system
and degrading its performance (normal call involves 2 ACKs, so that
there would be 3 db accesses instead of 1).
I think that it should be possible to resolve the problem by modifying
tm module to match ACKs for non-200 replies to original uri in INVITE
instead to rewriten one. What do you think? Is there any potential
problems with this approach?
-Maxim
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 10:41:31PM +0200, Jiri Kuthan wrote:
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers Maxim,
neither did I find a reason why the ACK is not matched. I might be
wrong but my guess is that it is a config issue -- are you sure it
enters t_relay in your script?
-Jiri
At 09:19 PM 4/7/2003, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
>Folks,
>
>I found that in the stateful mode, SER is having troubles matching
>ACKs to negative replies when Vovida B2BUA (1.5.0) is used as one
>UA, while Cisco ATA 186 as another one. Following is a dump of the
>session illustrating the problem. As you can see, SER keeps
>retransmiting 480, despite receiving properly formed ACKs. Does
>anybody have any ideas what the problem might be?
>
>-Maxim
>P.S. I am also seeing in the logs the following warnings:
>
>Apr 7 12:05:28 demo ser[86090]: WARNING: sip_msg_cloner: header body ignored: 4096
>
>
>B2BUA->SER
>
>INVITE sip:16045215277@demo.portaone.com:5060;transport=udp;user=phone SIP/2.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>cisco-GUID: 200546447-2237180178-1764455078-2518034476
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Max-Forwards: 10
>Expires: 300
>Contact: <sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>
>User-Agent: PortaSIP (030401b)
>Content-Type: application/sdp
>Content-Length: 309
>o=380442466396 20916528 20916528 IN IP4 192.168.1.20
>s=ATA186 Call
>c=IN IP4 193.111.9.226
>t=0 0
>m=audio 14000 RTP/AVP 4 8 0 101
>a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
>a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000/1
>a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000/1
>a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
>a=fmtp:101 0-15
>a=direction:active
>a=oldmediaip:192.168.1.20
>
>SER->B2BUA
>
>SIP/2.0 100 trying -- your call is important to us
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Server: Sip EXpress router (0.8.10 (i386/freebsd))
>Content-Length: 0
>
>SER->ATA
>
>INVITE sip:16045215277@172.17.1.127:5060;user=phone;transport=udp SIP/2.0
>Record-Route: <sip:16045215277@64.180.102.72;branch=0>
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72;branch=z9hG4bK56f9.3c3c97acad0bdb329284be13e26ccc54.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>cisco-GUID: 200546447-2237180178-1764455078-2518034476
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Max-Forwards: 9
>Expires: 300
>Contact: <sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>
>User-Agent: PortaSIP (030401b)
>Content-Type: application/sdp
>Content-Length: 309
>o=380442466396 20916528 20916528 IN IP4 192.168.1.20
>s=ATA186 Call
>c=IN IP4 193.111.9.226
>t=0 0
>m=audio 14000 RTP/AVP 4 8 0 101
>a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
>a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000/1
>a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000/1
>a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
>a=fmtp:101 0-15
>a=direction:active
>a=oldmediaip:192.168.1.20
>
>ATA->SER
>
>SIP/2.0 100 Trying
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72;branch=z9hG4bK56f9.3c3c97acad0bdb329284be13e26ccc54.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Server: Cisco ATA 186 v2.15 ata18x (030401b)
>Content-Length: 0
>
>ATA->SER
>
>SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72;branch=z9hG4bK56f9.3c3c97acad0bdb329284be13e26ccc54.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Server: Cisco ATA 186 v2.15 ata18x (030401b)
>Content-Length: 201
>Content-Type: application/sdp
>o=16045215277 1110 1110 IN IP4 172.17.1.127
>s=ATA186 Call
>c=IN IP4 64.180.102.72
>t=0 0
>m=audio 10000 RTP/AVP 4 101
>a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
>a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
>a=fmtp:101 0-15
>
>SER->B2BUA
>
>SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Server: Cisco ATA 186 v2.15 ata18x (030401b)
>Content-Length: 221
>Content-Type: application/sdp
>o=16045215277 1110 1110 IN IP4 172.17.1.127
>s=ATA186 Call
>c=IN IP4 64.180.102.72
>t=0 0
>m=audio 10000 RTP/AVP 4 101
>a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
>a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
>a=fmtp:101 0-15
>a=direction:active
>
>ATA->SER
>
>SIP/2.0 480 Temporarily Not Available
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72;branch=z9hG4bK56f9.3c3c97acad0bdb329284be13e26ccc54.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Server: Cisco ATA 186 v2.15 ata18x (030401b)
>Content-Length: 0
>
>SER->B2BUA
>
>SIP/2.0 480 Temporarily Not Available
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Server: Cisco ATA 186 v2.15 ata18x (030401b)
>Content-Length: 0
>
>B2BUA->SER
>
>ACK sip:16045215277@demo.portaone.com:5060;transport=udp;user=phone SIP/2.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 ACK
>Max-Forwards: 70
>Content-Length: 0
>
>SER->ATA
>
>ACK sip:16045215277@172.17.1.127:5060;user=phone;transport=udp SIP/2.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72;branch=z9hG4bKbc52.5db2fe1211adfdd0d5db3db6e2295344.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 ACK
>Max-Forwards: 69
>Content-Length: 0
>
>SER->B2BUA
>
>SIP/2.0 480 Temporarily Not Available
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Server: Cisco ATA 186 v2.15 ata18x (030401b)
>Content-Length: 0
>
>B2BUA->SER
>
>ACK sip:16045215277@demo.portaone.com:5060;transport=udp;user=phone SIP/2.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 ACK
>Max-Forwards: 70
>Content-Length: 0
>
>SER->ATA
>
>ACK sip:16045215277@172.17.1.127:5060;user=phone;transport=udp SIP/2.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72;branch=z9hG4bKbc52.5db2fe1211adfdd0d5db3db6e2295344.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 ACK
>Max-Forwards: 69
>Content-Length: 0
>
>SER->B2BUA
>
>SIP/2.0 480 Temporarily Not Available
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 INVITE
>Server: Cisco ATA 186 v2.15 ata18x (030401b)
>Content-Length: 0
>
>B2BUA->SER
>
>ACK sip:16045215277@demo.portaone.com:5060;transport=udp;user=phone SIP/2.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 ACK
>Max-Forwards: 70
>Content-Length: 0
>
>SER->ATA
>
>ACK sip:16045215277@172.17.1.127:5060;user=phone;transport=udp SIP/2.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72;branch=z9hG4bKbc52.5db2fe1211adfdd0d5db3db6e2295344.0
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.180.102.72:5061
>To: <sip:121@64.180.102.72;user=phone>;tag=2698540533
>From:
<sip:380442466396@64.180.102.72:5061;user=phone>;tag=4505a91c4165b3ffb1b4df0ff79c2904
>Call-ID: 3135130751(a)192.168.1.20
>CSeq: 2 ACK
>Max-Forwards: 69
>Content-Length: 0
>
>[the last 3 repeat until timeout hits]
>_______________________________________________
>Serusers mailing list
>serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
>http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers