Thanks for looking at it, I have put in a notice message in the failure_route and it's not showing in the log which suggests it's not triggering this route at all.

I don't think it is treating the 401 as a failure route.

Keith


On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 1:54 PM, <sr-users-request@lists.sip-router.org> wrote:
Send sr-users mailing list submissions to
        sr-users@lists.sip-router.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        sr-users-request@lists.sip-router.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        sr-users-owner@lists.sip-router.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of sr-users digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: On register (Keith)
   2. Re: On register (Daniel-Constantin Mierla)
   3. Re: Apply changes made to sip reply in onreply_route
      (Klaus Darilion)
   4. Re: Presence: Duplicate entry
      'username-domain-presence-*#-OFFLINE-#*' for key 'presentity_idx'
      when multiple clients register using the same credentials (Yufei Tao)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 12:31:20 +0100
From: Keith <keith@hubner.co.uk>
To: "SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) -
        Users   Mailing List" <sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] On register
Message-ID:
        <CAK7Ybu96QT+xt6BqJCjemai5En8uZ7VHigCg=AFvpP5tUYKXWw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi,

I am trying to "on register" from kamailio to an asterisk box. I am having
trouble when asterisk sends a 401 to the first register response. I have
tried to set a failure route as follows:
t_on_failure("FAILURE_HANDLE");

failure_route[FAILURE_HANDLE] {

       if (t_is_canceled()) {
exit;
}

       if(t_check_status("401")) {
          uac_auth();
       }



       t_relay();
    }

But it doesn't see to send the credentials back.

Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Keith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20131008/880c82c1/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:36:57 +0200
From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda@gmail.com>
To: "Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List"
        <sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] On register
Message-ID: <5253EE59.6030906@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"

Hello,

haven't had time to look into sources, can you try:

$ru = $ru;

after uac_auth()?

What I am trying to discover is if uac_auth() creates a new branch,
because if it doesn't and you don't update any of the elements related
to next hop address, kamailio won't detect there is need for a new relay.

If still doesn't work, then provide the log messages with debug=3 in
config file.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 10/8/13 1:31 PM, Keith wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to "on register" from kamailio to an asterisk box. I am
> having trouble when asterisk sends a 401 to the first register
> response. I have tried to set a failure route as follows:
> t_on_failure("FAILURE_HANDLE");
>
> failure_route[FAILURE_HANDLE] {
>
>        if (t_is_canceled()) {
> exit;
> }
>
>        if(t_check_status("401")) {
>           uac_auth();
>        }
>
>
>        t_relay();
>     }
>
> But it doesn't see to send the credentials back.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Keith
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users@lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio Advanced Trainings - Berlin, Nov 25-28; Miami, Nov 18-20, 2013
   - more details about Kamailio trainings at http://www.asipto.com -

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20131008/318c7a9a/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:50:40 +0200
From: Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at>
To: sr-users@lists.sip-router.org
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] Apply changes made to sip reply in
        onreply_route
Message-ID: <5253FFA0.7070201@pernau.at>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"

Am 08.10.2013 12:14, schrieb Grant Bagdasarian:
>
> Hello,
>
> I've setup two Kamailio machines, one which does all the processing
> and the second one which always replies with a 500 Server Internal
> Error, to test my Dispatcher fail-over.
>
> When routing a call, the call is always routed to the second Kamailio
> first, to test the fail-over.
>
> What happens in this scenario is the 500 is received by the main
> Kamailio and the 500 message is duplicated to the capture server.
> After this the failure_route kicks in and the 500 is obviously never
> sent back to the initiator.
>
> The changes made to the 500 message  (adding a new header), in
> onreply_route, aren't present when the message is duplicated to the
> capture server, because the original 500 message is duplicated instead
> of the modified one.
>
Out of curiosity -why do you add a header to the response if it is
likely to be dropped (depending of the response in the second branch)?
Just to signal data to the capture server?

klaus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20131008/d68c13e0/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:54:47 +0100
From: Yufei Tao <yufei.tao@redembedded.com>
To: <sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] Presence: Duplicate entry
        'username-domain-presence-*#-OFFLINE-#*' for key 'presentity_idx' when
        multiple clients register using the same credentials
Message-ID: <52540097.9080408@redembedded.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Thank you Juha for your replies!

>From RFC3856:

A Presence Event Package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)


6.11.  State Agents

   RFC 3265 [2] requires each package to consider the role of state
   agents in the package, and if they are used, to specify how
   authentication and authorization are done.

   State agents are core to this package.  Whenever the PA is not
   co-located with the PUA for the presentity, the PA is acting as a
   state agent.  It collects presence state from the PUA, and aggregates
   it into a presence document.  Because there can be multiple PUA, a
   centralized state agent is needed to perform this aggregation.  That
   is why state agents are fundamental to presence.  Indeed, they have a
   specific term that describes them - a presence server.

Seems the presence server needs to aggregate statuses from different PUAs for the same presentity into a single presence document, if I understand it correctly? Anyway it is not what happens currently with Kamailio 4.0.3 unless I'm missing anything.

Cheers,
Yufei

On 08/10/13 11:00, sr-users-request@lists.sip-router.org<mailto:sr-users-request@lists.sip-router.org> wrote:

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 13:31:17 +0300
From: Juha Heinanen <jh@tutpro.com><mailto:jh@tutpro.com>
To: "Kamailio \(SER\) - Users Mailing List"
        <sr-users@lists.sip-router.org><mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] Presence: Duplicate entry
        'username-domain-presence-*#-OFFLINE-#*' for key 'presentity_idx' when
        multiple clients register using the same credentials
Message-ID: <21074.36213.575240.614265@siika.tutpro.com><mailto:21074.36213.575240.614265@siika.tutpro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Yufei Tao writes:



> When a client (S) subscribes to this contact (username@domain) whose
> credentials are used by two clients, (S) gets NOTIFYs containing
> statuses from either of the username@domain contacts in alternation. But
> all these NOTIFYs have the same call-id.
>
> I've tried remove the constraint 'CONSTRAINT presentity_idx UNIQUE
> (username, domain, event, etag)' from the presentity table and the
> errors have gone away. Just wondering if this is something that *should*
> be done to cope with the situation where multiple presentities use the
> same credentials.


before knowing how to answer to that, i would like to know what presence
rfcs say about this situation, i.e., is current kamailio presence
implementation somehow broken when an aor (= presentity) has several
active contacts.

should notify give status of both contacts separately or should presence
server try somehow to combine status of the contacts into a single
notify?  what does it mean if one contact tells that it is offline and
another online?  should presence server send only one notify telling
that the presentity is online (since it is if one contact tells so)?

-- juha




On 05/10/13 11:00, sr-users-request@lists.sip-router.org<mailto:sr-users-request@lists.sip-router.org> wrote:


Hi

I use kamailio 4.0.3 with presence. I sometimes get these errors:

Oct  4 09:26:24 server /usr/sbin/kamailio[1292]: ERROR: presence
[publish.c:171]: msg_presentity_clean(): Marking presentity
Oct  4 09:26:34 server /usr/sbin/kamailio[1292]: ERROR: db_mysql
[km_dbase.c:122]: db_mysql_submit_query(): driver error on query:
Duplicate entry 'username-domain-presence-*#-OFFLINE-#*' for key
'presentity_idx'
Oct  4 09:26:34 server /usr/sbin/kamailio[1292]: ERROR: <core>
[db_query.c:337]: db_do_update(): error while submitting query
Oct  4 09:26:34 server /usr/sbin/kamailio[1292]: ERROR: presence
[presentity.c:1281]: mark_presentity_for_delete(): unsuccessful sql
update operation

This is when multiple SIP clients are registered using the same
credentials, they each have a presentity entry, with the same username
and domain but different etags, which is fine. But when they expire, the
presentity.etag will be filled with '*#-OFFLINE-#*', and when both
expire at about the same time, kamailio tries to fill both with the same
'*#-OFFLINE-#*' etag. Because presentity table has a 'CONSTRAINT
presentity_idx UNIQUE (username, domain, event, etag)', this gives the
errors.

Should the constraint be removed to cope with this situation?

Thank you!
Yufei

--
Yufei Tao
Red Embedded

This E-mail and any attachments hereto are strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended addressee please notify the sender by return and delete the message.

You must not disclose, forward or copy this E-mail or attachments to any third party without the prior consent of the sender.

Red Embedded Design, Company Number 06688253 Registered in England: The Waterfront, Salts Mill Rd, Saltaire, BD17 7EZ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20131008/41e137a4/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
sr-users mailing list
sr-users@lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users


End of sr-users Digest, Vol 101, Issue 32
*****************************************