There's a whole lot of loglines at debug=4. I grabbed the block of lines that seem to belong to the failing INVITE.

2(5209) INFO: <script>: INVITE sip:john.doe.1@1.mail.example.com (F: sip:john.doe.2@1.mail.example.com, T: sip:john.doe.1@1.mail.example.com)

2(5209) DEBUG: <core> [msg_translator.c:206]: check_via_address(): check_via_address(10.0.0.1, 10.0.0.1, 0)

2(5209) DEBUG: siputils [checks.c:103]: has_totag(): no totag

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1100]: t_check_msg(): DEBUG: t_check_msg: msg id=9 global id=7 T start=(nil)

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:534]: t_lookup_request(): t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=307, isACK=0

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:492]: matching_3261(): DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matching failed

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:716]: t_lookup_request(): DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no transaction found

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1169]: t_check_msg(): DEBUG: t_check_msg: msg id=9 global id=9 T end=(nil)

2(5209) INFO: <script>: LOCATION

2(5209) DEBUG: registrar [lookup.c:181]: lookup(): contact for [john.doe.1@1.mail.example.com] found by address

2(5209) INFO: <script>: RELAY

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1400]: t_newtran(): DEBUG: t_newtran: msg id=9 , global msg id=9 , T on entrance=(nil)

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:534]: t_lookup_request(): t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=307, isACK=0

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:492]: matching_3261(): DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matching failed

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:716]: t_lookup_request(): DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no transaction found

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_hooks.c:374]: run_reqin_callbacks_internal(): DBG: trans=0x7f3c9ac29d90, callback type 1, id 0 entered

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_handlers.c:724]: dlg_onreq(): dialog creation on config flag

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:664]: internal_get_dlg(): no dialog callid='a84d5218-a202-1231-5d9f-52540051a1d1' found

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:695]: get_dlg(): no dialog callid='a84d5218-a202-1231-5d9f-52540051a1d1' found

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:439]: build_new_dlg(): new dialog on hash 3304

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_handlers.c:274]: populate_leg_info(): route_set , contact sip:john.doe.3@2.mail.example.com:5080;transport=udp;gw=testpbxs1, cseq 49802847 and bind_addr udp:10.0.0.2:5060

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:718]: link_dlg(): linking dialog [3304:2157]

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:727]: link_dlg(): ref dlg 0x7f3c9ac2b0c0 with 1 -> 1

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:747]: dlg_ref(): ref dlg 0x7f3c9ac2b0c0 with 1 -> 2

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_profile.c:406]: set_current_dialog(): setting current dialog [3304:2157]

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:765]: dlg_unref(): unref dlg 0x7f3c9ac2b0c0 with 1 -> 1

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:600]: dlg_lookup(): ref dlg 0x7f3c9ac2b0c0 with 1 -> 2

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:602]: dlg_lookup(): dialog id=2157 found on entry 3304

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_handlers.c:729]: dlg_onreq(): dialog added to tm callbacks

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:765]: dlg_unref(): unref dlg 0x7f3c9ac2b0c0 with 1 -> 1

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_hooks.c:374]: run_reqin_callbacks_internal(): DBG: trans=0x7f3c9ac29d90, callback type 1, id 0 entered

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:347]: t_relay_to(): SER: new INVITE

2(5209) DEBUG: <core> [msg_translator.c:206]: check_via_address(): check_via_address(10.0.0.1, 10.0.0.1, 0)

2(5209) DEBUG: <core> [mem/shm_mem.c:111]: _shm_resize(): WARNING:vqm_resize: resize(0) called

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:706]: _reply_light(): DEBUG: reply sent out. buf=0x7f3ca36c25a0: SIP/2.0 100 trying -..., shmem=0x7f3c9ac2c7f0: SIP/2.0 100 trying -

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:716]: _reply_light(): DEBUG: _reply_light: finished

2(5209) DEBUG: <script>: new branch [0] to sip:93m51afg@nj1hjakcqv9a.invalid;transport=ws

2(5209) WARNING: <core> [msg_translator.c:2499]: via_builder(): TCP/TLS connection (id: 0) for WebSocket could not be found

2(5209) ERROR: <core> [msg_translator.c:1725]: build_req_buf_from_sip_req(): could not create Via header

2(5209) ERROR: tm [t_fwd.c:435]: prepare_new_uac(): could not build request

2(5209) ERROR: tm [t_fwd.c:1534]: t_forward_nonack(): ERROR: t_forward_nonack: failure to add branches

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:357]: t_relay_to(): ERROR:tm:t_relay_to: t_forward_nonack returned error

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:365]: t_relay_to(): -2 error reply generation delayed

2(5209) DEBUG: <core> [msg_translator.c:206]: check_via_address(): check_via_address(10.0.0.1, 10.0.0.1, 0)

2(5209) ERROR: sl [sl_funcs.c:371]: sl_reply_error(): ERROR: sl_reply_error used: No error (2/SL)

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:600]: dlg_lookup(): ref dlg 0x7f3c9ac2b0c0 with 1 -> 2

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:602]: dlg_lookup(): dialog id=2157 found on entry 3304

2(5209) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_hash.c:765]: dlg_unref(): unref dlg 0x7f3c9ac2b0c0 with 1 -> 1

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1553]: t_unref(): t_unref: delayed error reply generation(-2)

2(5209) DEBUG: <core> [msg_translator.c:206]: check_via_address(): check_via_address(10.0.0.1, 10.0.0.1, 0)

2(5209) DEBUG: tm [t_hooks.c:288]: run_trans_callbacks_internal(): DBG: trans=0x7f3c9ac29d90, callback type 1048576, id 0 entered

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda@gmail.com> wrote:

Can you get the logs with debug=4?

It doesn't seem like the same problem with the one reported initially in this thread.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 9/25/13 6:04 PM, Tais Plougmann Hansen wrote:

I found out that when a subscriber has multiple contacts (ie. by stopping and starting the WS client), kamailio either fails matching the connection or matches the wrong one. Setting registrar max_contacts to 1 and using save("location", "0x04") solved this problem for me.

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Tais Plougmann Hansen <taisph@osd.dk> wrote:

I am getting this error when trying to call from an ip phone -> kamailio -> freeswitch -> kamailio -> jssip. It looks like it can't match the invited subscriber to a WS connection. Calls from jssip to ip phone works (although it hangs up after 3-4 seconds for some reason).

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda@gmail.com> wrote:

Can you get the ngrep on the server from the initial invite to the ack. It seems that record route is not properly mirrored, so one client might mess the route path.

Cheers,
Daniel
-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio Advanced Trainings - Berlin, Oct 21-24; Miami, Nov 11-13, 2013
  - more details about Kamailio trainings at http://www.asipto.com -

--
Tais Plougmann Hansen

OSD Consulting ApS
osd.dk
Tel: +45 78101078
CVR: DK31332737