Hello,traveling, so not much time available ...I looked over the logs when expected socket is not used, I couldn't spot any message about selecting the socket, so there is a route from them "wrong" socket to the destination.Do you have "mhomed=1" in kamailio.cfg?Cheers,DanielOn Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 5:27 PM Leonid Fainshtein <leonid.fainshtein@xorcom.com> wrote:Dear Daniel,Did you have a chance to check the traces?Best regards,
LeonidOn Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 9:15 AM Leonid Fainshtein <leonid.fainshtein@xorcom.com> wrote:Hello Daniel,
The requested traces can be downloaded by using the link below:
http://updates.xorcom.com/~xorcom/kam-tcp-problem.tar.gz
I don't use the force send socket option and doesn't route out via
dispatcher in this particular call flow.
I found that the problem happens only when the "listen" parameters are
defined in the Kamailio configuration.
Thus the server where I made the tests have the following IPs configured:
2: ens32: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc fq_codel
state UP group default qlen 1000
link/ether 00:0c:29:ad:af:e9 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 192.168.9.103/20 brd 192.168.15.255 scope global dynamic ens32
3: lxdbr0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue
state UP group default qlen 1000
link/ether fe:d8:26:e7:21:dc brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 10.28.80.1/24 scope global lxdbr0
The request is accepted on 10.28.80.1 and forwarded from 192.168.9.103
If I define:
listen=udp:10.28.80.1:5060
listen=tcp:10.28.80.1:5060
listen=udp:192.168.9.103:5060
listen=tcp:192.168.9.103:5060
Then the problem occurs. Ref. files syslog-bad.log and bad.cap.
If I remove all of the 'listen' parameters then the forwarded INVITE
request is built properly. Ref. files syslog-good.log and good.cap
Best regards,
Leonid Fainshtein
Xorcom Ltd
Best regards,
Leonid Fainshtein
Xorcom Ltd
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 9:53 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<miconda@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> set debug = 3 in kamailio cfg and reproduce this case. Send here all the
> log messages printed by kamailio from the moment it receives the request
> till it sends it out.
>
> Some further questions:
>
> - do you use any force send socket option?
> - do you route out via dispatcher? If yes, is the socket attribute set?
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
> On 08.07.19 21:23, Leonid Fainshtein wrote:
> > Hello,
> > The source address is correct: 192.168.0.31. I see it in tcpdump and
> > also in sngrep.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Leonid
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 9:02 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla
> > <miconda@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> when you look at the network traffic 9e.g., with ngrep, sngrep, ...)
> >> what is shown as source address for outbound leg?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >> On 08.07.19 19:21, Leonid Fainshtein wrote:
> >>> I just found Daniel's response to a similar question (ref.:
> >>> https://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/2019-February/104853.html):
> >>>
> >>> "check the routing rules/table of the operating systems, there should be
> >>> some differences between the two servers.
> >>> If you mhomed=1 and an unexpected interface is used for routing out the
> >>> traffic, it means that the operating system has internal routing rules that
> >>> allow going from that interface to the target address."
> >>>
> >>> Don't see anything suspicious in my server routing table:
> >>>
> >>> default via 192.168.0.1 dev eno1 proto static
> >>> 10.159.65.0/24 dev lxdbr0 proto kernel scope link src 10.159.65.1
> >>> 172.200.4.0/24 dev eno1 proto kernel scope link src 172.200.4.1
> >>> 192.168.0.0/20 dev eno1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.31
> >>>
> >>> The request is received on the lxdbr0 interface (10.159.65.1) and sent
> >>> out from the eno1 interface (192.168.0.31).
> >>> I even tried to delete the default route but nothing helped. The
> >>> request is sent out with 10.159.65.1 in the via and Record-Route
> >>> fields...
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>> Leonid
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 6:20 PM Leonid Fainshtein
> >>> <leonid.fainshtein@xorcom.com> wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>> Kamailio server has two legs that are connected to different networks.
> >>>> I'm using Kamailio v.5.2.3 and the "enable_double_rr" is implicitly set to "1".
> >>>> The leg "A" IP address is 10.159.65.1
> >>>> The leg "B" IP address is 192.168.0.31
> >>>> The call is initiated from 10.159.65.18
> >>>>
> >>>> According to the "rr" module documentation, function record_route()
> >>>> should insert two "Record_Route" header fields when a request is
> >>>> accepted on one leg is should go out via the second leg. This works as
> >>>> expected in case of UDP protocol:
> >>>>
> >>>> INVITE sip:2000@192.168.6.106:5460;transport=UDP SIP/2.0
> >>>> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.31;r2=on;lr;did=e2c.a191>
> >>>> Record-Route: <sip:10.159.65.1;r2=on;lr;did=e2c.a191>
> >>>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
> >>>> 192.168.0.31;branch=z9hG4bKcfa5.d64ecbd87d5315b5993c4ccf16f86537.0
> >>>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.159.65.18:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK3a9e9a4d
> >>>>
> >>>> But when the TCP protocol is used then the outbound message looks like this:
> >>>>
> >>>> INVITE sip:2005@192.168.0.178:35058;transport=tcp SIP/2.0
> >>>> Record-Route: <sip:10.159.65.1;transport=tcp;lr;did=bb6.7dc1>
> >>>> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP
> >>>> 10.159.65.1;branch=z9hG4bKc85a.14afc3867dd3220826f9b9940f78168f.0;i=3
> >>>> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.159.65.18:5060;rport=58616;branch=z9hG4bK1469331f
> >>>>
> >>>> There are two problems there:
> >>>> a) only one Record-Route with leg is inserted
> >>>> b) the added "Via" header field contains the leg "A" IP address
> >>>> instead of expected leg "B" IP address (192.168.0.31). In the LAN
> >>>> trace I see that in reality the message was sent from leg "B".
> >>>>
> >>>> Is it a bug?
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>> Leonid Fainshtein
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> >>> sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
> >>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
> >> --
> >> Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
> >> www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
> >>
> --
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
> www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>
--Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com