12 Feb
2007
12 Feb
'07
5:31 p.m.
Yes, your request-uri is sip:hellboy@192.168.0.116:5060 which I think
will not be looked up in location (lookup_contact should fail), so it
does not rewrite the request-uri at all.
Michal
On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 16:05 +0100, tzieleniewski wrote:
hmm
it is strange because I can see that after attr2uri and t_relay() message again enters
the main route block and goes through the whole processing but I can't see the message
being send through the network. the recourd_route and via headers are being attached which
is visible in the message send to unwanted (contained in the first invite - in this case
myself because I try this by calling my self and setting forward_blind to another sip uri)
destination:
U 2007/02/12 16:05:12.199566 192.168.0.74:5060 -> 192.168.0.116:5060
INVITE sip:hellboy@192.168.0.116:5060 SIP/2.0.
Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.74;ftag=218741881;lr=on>.
Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.74;ftag=218741881;lr=on>.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.0.74;branch=z9hG4bK5141.91077cd7.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.0.74;branch=z9hG4bK5141.81077cd7.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
192.168.0.116:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK0FCAE301A64EA5A82F9E7BE990AD76FB.
From: hellboy <sip:hellboy@voip.touk.pl>;tag=218741881.
To: <sip:hellboy@voip.touk.pl>.
Contact: <sip:hellboy@192.168.0.116:5060>.
Call-ID: 4C739990-7D22-D9F2-72CE-D5F10A9BC99F(a)192.168.0.116.
CSeq: 54988 INVITE.
Proxy-Authorization: Digest
username="hellboy",realm="voip.touk.pl",nonce="45d08354b71cd0fddc45daa67447c271fd6b36db",response="054c2a5a43cb527ea70a8040dde9aaa0",uri="sip:hellboy@voip.touk.pl",qop=auth,cnonce="29546711E944E708A52A2122A1E71614",nc=00000001.
Max-Forwards: 15.
Content-Type: application/sdp.
User-Agent: X-Lite release 1105d.
Content-Length: 240.
P-hint: usrloc applied.
I put the whole ngrep output in the attached file
Tomasz
> Seems very strange to me, that incoming message would remember the
> request uri as it was before rewrite.... do you really forward it?
>
> Please attach network capture.
>
> Michal
>
> On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 15:23 +0100, tzieleniewski wrote:
> > Thanks it worked but another thing appeared:)
> >
> > Everything works fine, I see the message being routed again to ser with
> > different ruri but at the end of the message processing when I invoke the
> > lookup_contacts("location") function the message is forwarded to the
location which
> > corresponds to the first ruri which was changed by attr2uri() function.
> > Please point me what do I miss.
> >
> > Generally my procedure looks like this:
> >
> > if inbound user then
> > check if user have forward_blind parameter
> > if yes
> > rewrite ruri (attr2uri("$tr.forward_blind")) and forward with
> > t_relay()
> >
> > So for instance when I call myself and have the forward_blind set on the
account on which user is not registered I get the 486 - busy response instead of the
unavailable user.
> >
> >
> > > On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 14:32 +0100, tzieleniewski wrote:
> > > > Hi again
> > > > I found out that there appears the following error in the log:
> > > > Feb 12 14:37:53 rd ser[3979]: parse_nameaddr(): No < found
> > >
> > > The attr_destination uses the same uri parser as core, and is able to
> > > accept event the nameaddr specification... so if you put uri without
<>
> > > you will get this "warning".
> > >
> > > It just rewrites internal next hop, so the t_relay will send it as
> > > appropriate. If you want to rewrite the request uri too use attr2uri
> > > function call together with it.
> > >
> > > Michal
> > >
> > > > Please give me a hand with this issue:)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance
> > > > -tomasz
> > > >
> > > > > Hi!!
> > > > >
> > > > > I am trying to set up the blind call forwarding with the usage
of attr_destination()
> > > > > function.
> > > > > I do the following I load the user attributes from user_attrs
and uri_attrs table and then according to the loaded parameters I do:
> > > > >
> > > > > if ($tu.call_forward == "blind" &&
$tr.forward_blind)
> > > > > {
> > > > > xlog("L_INFO", " route[CALL_FORWARD]: fwd
\n");
> > > > > attr_destination("$tr.forward_blind");
> > > > > xlog("L_INFO", " route[CALL_FORWARD]:
route(FORWARD) \n");
> > > > > route(FORWARD);
> > > > > xlog("L_INFO", " route[CALL_FORWARD]: drop
\n");
> > > > > drop;
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > after the ser.cfg logic goes through this part I don't see
any change in the request uri?? Please point me what do I miss?
> > > > >
> > > > > here is my database contents:
> > > > > mysql> select * from user_attrs where uid like
'hellboy%' and name like 'call_%';
> > > > > +----------------------+--------------+-------+------+-------+
> > > > > | uid | name | value | type | flags |
> > > > > +----------------------+--------------+-------+------+-------+
> > > > > | hellboy(a)voip.touk.pl | call_forward | blind | 2 | 1 |
> > > > > +----------------------+--------------+-------+------+-------+
> > > > > 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
> > > > >
> > > > > mysql> select * from uri_attrs where username like
'hellboy%';
> > > > >
+----------+--------------+---------------+----------------------+------+-------+--------+
> > > > > | username | did | name | value
| type | flags | scheme |
> > > > >
+----------+--------------+---------------+----------------------+------+-------+--------+
> > > > > | hellboy | voip.touk.pl | forward_blind | sip:tzl@voip.touk.pl
| 2 | 1 | sip |
> > > > >
+----------+--------------+---------------+----------------------+------+-------+--------+
> > > > > 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > > -tomasz
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Serusers mailing list
> > > > > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> > > > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Serusers mailing list
> > > > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> > > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> > >
>