Re: [Serusers] t_uac_dlg() bug ?

OK. I think I understand. Since the SIP request is injected straight into SER via the t_uac_dlg() FIFO command, I had presumed the request would get dumped into the route[0] block like any other request coming into SER from a UDP port. If this were the case I'd expect the normal "if(uri == myself)" type checks to catch the request and do the appropriate thing. But if I follow your reply, this isn't the case. If I understand what you say correctly, the t_uac_dlg() command works just like some UAC out on the network, and needs to have the IP address of its proxy either hard coded, or resolvable via some means (hosts file, DNS). Once this resolved, it sends the request to SER via networking calls and normal processing ensues. Is this correct ? If this is all true, then it means that for the current SERweb CTD functionality to work, you need a host file or DNS entry for all SIP domains served by your SER server, since SERweb delivers the dummy INVITE URI in the "sip:name@domain" form instead of "sip:name@ip" form. Is this all correct ? Presuming the above is correct, one problem I can see with this requirement is that in some instances, it may be impossible for someone to add the DNS SRV entries (no access to DNS server, for instance), and impractical to add /etc/hosts aliases for the SIP domain, since doing so could possibly break other things in the system, such as email routing on that host (I think sendmail, etc would assume that the machine was the mail server for that domain if such an alias existed). In this sort of situation, the user might want to hard code the IP address of the SIP proxy to contact, much as you do when you configure SIP phones. If you wanted to somehow "hard code" the SIP proxy called by changing the PHP code in SERweb, could you do so "properly" ? I could see how changing the URI from "sip:user@domain" to "sip:user@ip-of-SIP-proxy" in the PHP would work, but wouldn't that break a multi-domain situation, since the domain of the user in question would be lost ? Perhaps if just the INVITE URI were changed to "sip:user@ip-of-SIP-proxy" form, and the "To: " header in the SIP request were left in "sip:user@domain" form, things would still work ? Or perhaps other headers could be changed/added in the SIP request that would allow t_uac_dlg() to figure out which IP to contact for the request without needing to do a host lookup ? Or maybe the best approach would be to add an optional IP-address argument to the t_uac_dlg() command which specifies the SIP server to call (for instance, ":t_dlg_uac:reply_fifo_name[:IP of SIP server to call]") ? TIA, Jim Jiri Kuthan wrote: -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Jim Burwell - Sr. Systems/Network/Security Engineer, JSBC | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | "I never let my schooling get in the way of my education." - Mark Twain | | "UNIX was never designed to keep people from doing stupid things, because | | that policy would also keep them from doing clever things." - Doug Gwyn | | "Cool is only three letters away from Fool" - Mike Muir, Suicyco | | "..Government in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst | | state an intolerable one.." - Thomas Paine, "Common Sense" (1776) | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Email: jimb(a)jsbc.cc ICQ UIN: 1695089 | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Reply problems ? Turn off the "sign" function in email prog. Blame MS. | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+