Hi Victor,

I tested  5.7.6 and 5.8.3 and got the same results.
At the moment request_route is very simple.

request_route {
    xlog("L_INFO", ">> $ru from $fu\n");

    route(REQINIT);

    force_rport();

    if(!ds_is_from_list()) {
        if( !loose_route() ) {
            if( !ds_select_dst(DEFAULT_ROUTE, "1") ) {
                drop();
            }
        }

        if (nat_uac_test("19")) {
            if (method=="REGISTER") {
                fix_nated_register();
            } else {
                fix_nated_contact();
            }
        }


        add_path_received();
    }
    record_route();
    forward();
}

This is the logs of ack

DEBUG: [1 90333697 ACK ...] <core> [core/receive.c:263]: ksr_evrt_pre_routing(): event route core:pre-routing not defined
DEBUG: [1 90333697 ACK ...] <core> [core/receive.c:474]: receive_msg(): preparing to run routing scripts...
DEBUG: [1 90333697 ACK ...] sl [sl_funcs.c:455]: sl_filter_ACK(): too late to be a local ACK!
[137B blob data]
[134B blob data]
ERROR: [1 90333697 ACK ...] pv [pv_core.c:261]: pv_get_ruri(): failed to parse the R-URI
DEBUG: [1 90333697 ACK ...] <core> [core/parser/parse_addr_spec.c:185]: parse_to_param(): add param: tag=BrQ6ZyDyQHQmN
DEBUG: [1 90333697 ACK ...] <core> [core/parser/parse_addr_spec.c:904]: parse_addr_spec(): end of header reached, state=29

Could this be a bug or did I miss something?


On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 4:47 PM Victor Seva via sr-users <sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> wrote:
Hi,

I would suggest to try a more recent Kamailio version first.

On 23/10/24 14:21, Ale via sr-users wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I think I have a problem with topoh, but I can't identify it.
>
> Kamailio 5.6.6, used as a stateless proxy, receives a 487 from a phone and propagates it correctly.
> Next comes the ack that should be forwarded back to the phone, but instead it doesn't forward it and produces the following error "pv_get_ruri(): failed to parse the R-URI"
>
> The error is generated by xlog("...$ru from $fu...\n"") as first line of request_route.
>
> If I disable topoh everything works perfectly.Topoh is only configured with mask_key only.
> Furthermore, not all phones generate this problem, at the moment there are some snoms.
>
> ACK sip:user@phone_ip:2048;line=kkqgarrj SIP/2.0
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP proxy_sip_ip;branch=z9hG4bK2ec.e7126a3134bef9d974f57dd43ebd4ea2.0
> Route: <sip:kamailio_ip:5060;lr;received=sip:phone_ip:2048>
> Max-Forwards: 66
> From: <sip:111111111@sip.example.com <mailto:sip%3A111111111@sip.example.com>>;tag=pDc1BQ0B57Ujj
> To: <sip:user@sip.example.com <mailto:sip%3Auser@sip.example.com>>;tag=vslvowy4y2
> Call-ID: 40a6c905-c0c8-4c20-b3f7-397b3fce58b6
> CSeq: 90285584 ACK
> Content Length: 0
>
> There is no difference between the ACK of the snom and other phones that work.
> The only difference I noticed is that the snom 487 contains Contact field in the header.
>
> Any suggestions? Thank you

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|   ,''`.                                             Victor Seva |
|  : :' :                      linuxmaniac@torreviejawireless.org |
|  `. `'  PGP: 8F19 CADC D42A 42D4 5563  730C 51A0 9B18 CF5A 5068 |
|    `-                                          Debian Developer |
  -----------------------------------------------------------------
__________________________________________________________
Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions
To unsubscribe send an email to sr-users-leave@lists.kamailio.org
Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender!
Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: