8 Dec
2022
8 Dec
'22
11:57 a.m.
Thanks for the update, great that you found a solution and reported back to the list.
Cheers,
Henning
--
Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/>
From: riffs(a)sina.cn <riffs(a)sina.cn>
Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 7:40 AM
To: Henning Westerholt <hw(a)gilawa.com>
Cc: sr-users <sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org>
Subject: Re: RE: [SR-Users] uac_req_send() multi-process synchronization problem
Thank you for your reply very much，Because this is my first mail list. Don't know need
keep the list in CC. I'm sorry.
I foun a paramter from cookbooks. It feels like setting the tcp_accept_unique to 1 avoids
this problem
tcp_accept_unique
If set to 1, reject duplicate connections coming from same source IP and port.
Default set to 0.
tcp_accept_unique = 1
tcp_accept_unique role in the source code:
if(tcp_accept_unique) {
if(tcpconn_exists(0, &tcpconn->rcv.dst_ip, tcpconn->rcv.dst_port,
&tcpconn->rcv.src_ip, tcpconn->rcv.src_port)) {
LM_ERR("duplicated connection by local and remote
addresses\n");
_tcpconn_free(tcpconn);
tcp_safe_close(new_sock);
return 1; /* success, because the accept was successful */
}
}
________________________________
riffs@sina.cn<mailto:riffs@sina.cn>
From: Henning Westerholt<mailto:hw@gilawa.com>
Date: 2022-12-01 18:23
To: riffs@sina.cn<mailto:riffs@sina.cn>
CC: sr-users@lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>
Subject: RE: Re: [SR-Users] uac_req_send() multi-process synchronization problem
Hello,
please keep the list in CC.
Not sure what you mean by multi-process safe. The functions are safe to use in a kamailio
multi-process context, relevant sections should be protected by internal locks etc..
Regarding query location manually by SQL client, its better to use the provided functions
from the usrloc/registrar module instead.
Cheers,
Henning
--
Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/>
From: riffs@sina.cn<mailto:riffs@sina.cn>
<riffs@sina.cn<mailto:riffs@sina.cn>>
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 10:47 AM
To: Henning Westerholt <hw@gilawa.com<mailto:hw@gilawa.com>>
Subject: Re: Re: [SR-Users] uac_req_send() multi-process synchronization problem
To confirm that. Are reg_fetch_contacts and unregister_ruid multi-process safe?
________________________________
riffs@sina.cn<mailto:riffs@sina.cn>
From: riffs@sina.cn<mailto:riffs@sina.cn>
Date: 2022-12-01 16:35
To: Henning Westerholt<mailto:hw@gilawa.com>
Subject: Re: RE: [SR-Users] uac_req_send() multi-process synchronization problem
Hello
Thank you for your reply very much. My LOCATION is stored in the MYSQL database, and I
also set the event_callback parameter of TCPOPS.
modparam("tcpops", "event_callback", "ksr_tcpops_event")
At the same time.I also deleted the contact inside the function
function ksr_tcpops_event(evname)
local tcpconnid = KSR.pv.get("$conid") or "0"
if (evname == "tcp:reset" or evname == "tcp:closed") and
(tonumber(tcpconnid) ~= 0) then
local sql = string.format("select * from location where tcpconnid=%s",
tcpconnid)
local count, rows = execute_select(sql)
if count > 0 then
KSR.registrar.unregister_ruid("location", rows[1].contact,
rows[1].ruid)
end
end
return 1
end
When I use use_req_send(), I use the following sql statement to query location
string.format("select * from location where username='%s'", reciever)
I think because the query sql is executed before the execution of unregister_ruid
completes, the location of user A can still be queried.
If unregister_ruid and reg_fetch_contacts are multi-process safe. I use reg_fetch_contacts
query location to avoid this problem. Is that so?
thanks very much
________________________________
riffs@sina.cn<mailto:riffs@sina.cn>
From: Henning Westerholt<mailto:hw@gilawa.com>
Date: 2022-11-30 18:18
To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List<mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>
CC: 刘建峰<mailto:riffs@sina.cn>
Subject: RE: [SR-Users] uac_req_send() multi-process synchronization problem
Hello,
not sure if I fully understand the problem. But regarding another user is registered with
the same IP address as a previous user, there are several mitigations.
To give two options: you could choose a really short re-registration time, you could use
TCP and when you lose the connection you delete the contact.
Cheers,
Henning
--
Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/>
From: sr-users
<sr-users-bounces@lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.kamailio.org>>
On Behalf Of ???
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 2:57 AM
To: sr-users@lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>
Subject: [SR-Users] uac_req_send() multi-process synchronization problem
When I use uac_req_send() to send a MESSAGE to the client. Will the following occur? The
result of the message sent to user A is that B has received it. From the logs, the address
of user A in the location table is the same as the IP address and port of user B, and the
information of user A in the location table is not deleted in time. I took the address of
user A directly from the location table without using KSR.registrar.reg_fetch_contacts().
If I use KSR.registrar.reg_fetch_contacts() can this be avoided. This is a multi-process
synchronization problem, after user A registers, the IP port information in the address is
172.16.22.222:12345, and then user A disconnects the link because of some abnormal
conditions, but it is not normal to cancel the registration, the socket link has failed,
but it has not had time to delete the location, at this time user B registers, whether
will it get the same IP port information as user A 172.16.22.222 : 12345, if possible?
User A's location still exists, Using KSR.registrar.reg_fetch_contacts() TO query user
A's location, and then using uac_req_send() to send a message to user A, User B will
receive the MESSAGE. Whether this problem occurs?
从 Windows 版邮件<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>发送