Did you load the module?

On Thursday, January 3, 2019 5:27:12 PM EST Andrew Chen wrote:

Hey it's me again.

So I'm following the instructions in the Kamailio 5.1.x wiki module page for websocket configuration and it specifically mention to set this block:

onreply_route[WS_REPLY] {

        xlog("L_INFO", "[CSeq $cs] Is in WS_REPLY.");

        xlog("L_INFO", "[CSeq $cs] Sending $rs $rr to $sel(via[2].host) via $sel(via[2].transport) len: $ml");

        xlog("L_INFO", "[CSeq $cs] \n$mb \n");

        if(nat_uac_test("64")) {

                # Do NAT traversal stuff for replies to a WebSocket connection

                # - even if it is not behind a NAT!

                # This won't be needed in the future if Kamailio and the

                # WebSocket client support Outbound and Path.

                add_contact_alias();

        }

}

When I did this and started up Kamailio, it gave me an error:

Jan  3 22:19:43 sjomainkama55 kamailio: ERROR: <core> [core/cfg.y:3309]: yyparse(): cfg. parser: failed to find command nat_uac_test (params 1)

I moved that if statement to a route block and I was able to start it up.

The wiki page for nathelper module specify this function can be run in onreply_route as well:

5.5.  nat_uac_test(flags)

Tries to guess if client's request originated behind a nat. The parameter determines what heuristics is used.

Meaning of the flags is as follows:

• 1 - The “Contact” header field is searched for occurrence of RFC1918 or RFC6598 addresses.
• 2 - the "received" test is used: address in the “Via” header is compared against source IP address of signaling
• 4 - The Top Most “Via” is searched for occurrence of RFC1918 or RFC6598 addresses
• 8 - The SDP is searched for occurrence of RFC1918 or RFC6598 addresses
• 16 - Test if the source port is different from the port in the “Via” header
• 32 - Test if the source IP address of signaling is a RFC1918 or RFC6598 address
• 64 - Test if the source connection of signaling is a WebSocket
• 128 - Test if the “Contact” header URI port differs from the source port of the request (Warning: this is might be legal or even intended combination in non NATted scenarios)

All flags can be bitwise combined, the test returns true if any of the tests identified a NAT.

This function can be used from REQUEST_ROUTE, ONREPLY_ROUTE, FAILURE_ROUTE, BRANCH_ROUTE.

is this some known bug in 5.1.x?

Thanks

--

Andy Chen

achen@fuze.com

*Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail and any
attachments may be confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please notify the sender and permanently delete the e-mail and any
attachments immediately. You should not retain, copy or use this e-mail or
any attachment for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of the
contents to any other person. Thank you.*