Ex. netstat -nlp | grep ser
will show you at the network level whether ser is listening.
If so, start ser in debug mode (i.e. stop it and then ser -d -d -d -E -D)
g-)
Martin Kjeldsen wrote:
Thanks.
Did a tcpdump and apparently the messages do reach the SER. But still
a very quiet SER :-(.
2005-05-31 14:29:26.533854 82.180.22.111 -> 212.97.222.xxx SIP
Request: REGISTER sip:test.cuatro.dk
2005-05-31 14:29:28.183699 82.180.22.111 -> 212.97.222.xxx SIP
Request: REGISTER sip:test.cuatro.dk
2005-05-31 14:29:31.194343 82.180.22.111 -> 212.97.222.xxx SIP
Request: REGISTER sip:test.cuatro.dk
2005-05-31 14:29:37.216605 82.180.22.111 -> 212.97.222.xxx SIP
Request: REGISTER sip:test.cuatro.dk
Could the problem still have something to do with the FIFO, or might
it be some other dependency, as to why the SER never sends any
response, in this case a 401 Unauthorized?
Thanks in advance
Martin
Greger V. Teigre wrote:
> Use ngrep or tcpdump port 5060 to see if there is any traffic.
> g-)
> Martin Kjeldsen wrote:
>
>> Hi there
>>
>> I'm having trouble registrering with my SER build (0.9.2), and using
>> the auth_mysql ser.cfg from
ONsip.org. It is as if SER isn't
>> recieving any of the messages from my UA, and I've been wondering
>> where I might have gone wrong. One thing I've found different from a
>> former build (0.8.14), I have up and running is the socks which SER
>> is listening on. When i do a serctl ps on the 0.9.2 i get this:
>>
>>
>> ser@sipsite:~/running/ser0.9.0/sbin> serctl ps
>> 200 ok
>> 0 22531 attendant
>> 1 22532 fifo server
>> 2 22533 receiver child=0 sock= 212.97.222.xxx:5060
>> 3 22534 receiver child=1 sock= 212.97.222.xxx:5060
>> 4 22535 receiver child=2 sock= 212.97.222.xxx:5060
>> 5 22536 receiver child=3 sock= 212.97.222.xxx:5060
>> 6 22537 timer
>> 7 22538 tcp receiver
>> 8 22539 tcp receiver
>> 9 22540 tcp receiver
>> 10 22541 tcp receiver
>> 11 22542 tcp main process
>>
>>
>> And as far as I can see the same command on 0.8.14 yields almost the
>> same output, except that the sock has a number like '0' and a @ sign
>> is between scok and ip (eg: sock=0 @ ip-adress)! Can this be the
>> cause of my troubles?
>> I'm afraid that I'm not that much into Unix and Sockets!
>>
>> Any and all help will be greatly appreciated!
>>
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Martin
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Serusers mailing list
>> serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
>>
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers