Maybe you have the old and the new version of ser installed at your system and you start the old one instead of hte new one.
klaus
Darren Nay wrote:
Hey All,
Are you sure that it's in the latest CVS stable release? I am using the following cvs command to grab the CVS release from yesterday, but it doesn't contain the t_relay_to_tcp function. It still contains the t_relay_to function.
cvs co -r rel_0_8_12 -D 2004-02-11 sip_router
If I'm doing something wrong then please let me know. :) Thanks!
Darren Nay - dnay@libertyisp.com
----- Original Message ----- From: "Klaus Darilion" klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at To: "Darren Nay" dnay@libertyisp.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 12:44 PM Subject: Re: [Serusers] TCP vs UDP
It exists in release 0_8_12, it is in the tm module.
Klaus
Darren Nay wrote:
Hey Guys,
Just another quick question. I'm sure that this is simple.
How do I forward all requests out using TCP rather than UDP? I have seen the mention of a function called "t_relay_to_tcp" .. howeve, it does not exist in the latest stable cvs version of ser? has it been removed? or is it only available in the unstable version?
Or is there another way to forward all requests as TCP? Currently we are using the t_relay function.
I have attached my current ser.cfg file.
Thanks for the help!
Darren Nay - dnay@libertyisp.com mailto:dnay@libertyisp.com
# # ----------- global configuration parameters ------------------------
debug=3 # debug level (cmd line: -dddddddddd) fork=yes log_stderror=no # (cmd line: -E)
## Uncomment these lines to enter debugging mode #fork=no #log_stderror=yes
check_via=no # (cmd. line: -v) dns=no # (cmd. line: -r) rev_dns=no # (cmd. line: -R) port=5060 children=4 fifo="/tmp/ser_fifo"
# ------------------ module loading ----------------------------------
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/mysql.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/tm.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/rr.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/maxfwd.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/acc.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/usrloc.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/registrar.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/textops.so"
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/auth.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/auth_db.so"
# !! Nathelper loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/nathelper.so"
# ----------------- setting module-specific parameters ---------------
# -- usrloc params --
modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 2)
# -- auth params -- modparam("auth_db", "calculate_ha1", yes) modparam("auth_db", "password_column", "password") modparam("auth_db", "db_url", "mysql://ser:heslo@localhost/ser")
# -- rr params -- # add value to ;lr param to make some broken UAs happy modparam("rr", "enable_full_lr", 1)
# !! Nathelper modparam("registrar", "nat_flag", 6) modparam("nathelper", "natping_interval", 30) # Ping interval 30 s modparam("nathelper", "ping_nated_only", 1) # Ping only clients behind
NAT
# -- acc params -- modparam("acc", "log_level", 1) modparam("acc", "db_flag", 3) modparam("acc", "db_url","mysql://ser:heslo@localhost/ser")
# ------------------------- request routing logic -------------------
# main routing logic
route{
# initial sanity checks -- messages with # max_forwards==0, or excessively long requests# if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) { # sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops"); # break; # }; if (msg:len >= max_len ) { sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); break; };
# !! Nathelper # Special handling for NATed clients; first, NAT test is # executed: it looks for via!=received and RFC1918 addresses # in Contact (may fail if line-folding is used); also, # the received test should, if completed, should check all # vias for rpesence of received if (nat_uac_test("3")) { # Allow RR-ed requests, as these may indicate that # a NAT-enabled proxy takes care of it; unless it is # a REGISTER if (method == "REGISTER" || ! search("^Record-Route:")){
log("LOG: Someone trying to register from privateIP, rewriting\n");
# This will work only for user agents that supportsymmetric
# communication. We tested quite many of them andmajority is
# smart enough to be symmetric. In some phones ittakes a configuration
# option. With Cisco 7960, it is calledNAT_Enable=Yes, with kphone it is
# called "symmetric media" and "symmetricsignalling".
fix_nated_contact(); # Rewrite contact with sourceIP of signalling
if (method == "INVITE") { fix_nated_sdp("1"); # Add direction=active toSDP
}; force_rport(); # Add rport parameter to topmost Via setflag(6); # Mark as NATed }; }; setflag(3); # we record-route all messages -- to make sure that # subsequent messages will go through our proxy; that's # particularly good if upstream and downstream entities # use different transport protocol if (!method=="REGISTER") record_route(); # subsequent messages withing a dialog should take the # path determined by record-routing if (loose_route()) { # mark routing logic in request append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n"); route(1); break; }; if (!uri==myself) { # mark routing logic in request append_hf("P-hint: outbound\r\n"); route(1); break; }; # if the request is for other domain use UsrLoc # (in case, it does not work, use the following command # with proper names and addresses in it) if (uri==myself) { if (method=="REGISTER") {# Uncomment this if you want to use digest authentication # if (!www_authorize("iptel.org", "subscriber")) { # www_challenge("iptel.org", "0"); # break; # };
save("location"); break; }; lookup("aliases"); if (!uri==myself) { append_hf("P-hint: outbound alias\r\n"); route(1); break; }; # native SIP destinations are handled using our USRLOCDB
if (!lookup("location")) { if (uri =~ "^sip:011.*") { rewritehostport("ld.gw.here"); } else { rewritehostport("pstn.gw.here"); }; route(1); break; }; }; append_hf("P-hint: usrloc applied\r\n"); route(1);}
route[1] { # !! Nathelper if (uri=~"[@:](192.168.|10.|172.(1[6-9]|2[0-9]|3[0-1]).)"
&& !search("^Route:")){
sl_send_reply("479", "We don't forward to private IPaddresses");
break; }; # if client or server know to be behind a NAT, enable relay if (isflagset(6)) { force_rtp_proxy(); }; # NAT processing of replies; apply to all transactions (forexample,
# re-INVITEs from public to private UA are hard to identify as # NATed at the moment of request processing); look at replies t_on_reply("1"); # send it out now; use stateful forwarding as it works reliably # even for UDP2TCP setflag(3); if (!t_relay()) { sl_reply_error(); };}
# !! Nathelper onreply_route[1] { # NATed transaction ? if (isflagset(6) && status =~ "(183)|2[0-9][0-9]") { fix_nated_contact(); force_rtp_proxy(); # otherwise, is it a transaction behind a NAT and we did not # know at time of request processing ? (RFC1918 contacts) } else if (nat_uac_test("1")) { fix_nated_contact(); }; }
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers