Inline.
Zappasodi Daniele wrote:
Many thanks for the reply, it is very useful but it contains bad news because, if is it possible, it is important for me to preserve the possibility to have the SIP proxy and SIP gateway in the same board.
Some other clarification:
- I have two ethernet interfaces, if I give different IP address to
proxy and gateway, can I leave them on the same hardware?
Yes, the trick is to get the listen and alias directives correct in your ser.cfg. You can run multiple servers or UAs on the same server, you just have to make sure you don't have alias=myip in ser.cfg. This will make SER believe messages for another server/UA is to be routed locally.
- If I correctly understand the transaction creation in SER: SER
absorbs the retransmission only if already exists a transaction for the original INVITE and SER creates a new transaction for an INVITE only when is invoked the t_relay.
Yes, if not, SER will be transaction stateless and just happily forward any message.
Consequently, If a retransmitted INVITE arrives when the elaboration of the original INVITE is still in progress, SER repeats all the elaboration also for the second INVITE.
I'm not sure what you mean by "elaboration", but if you mean that the script will be executed for retransmitted INVITEs, then yes.
Do you confirm my description?
I have built a function that in heavy load traffic condition could be slow (it does an external query, something similar to an exec) and it is important that I don't invoke it twice for the same INVITE, so I try to use t_newtran to anticipate the transaction creation before invoking this function.
However, as first step, I will remove the t_newtran, t_forward_nonack_uri and I try again.
Normally, you should not have to worry about the transaction state, just process the INVITE and use t_relay() and let SER handle the retransmissions etc. I cannot see that your scenario would require more fine-grained control over the transaction state, but then I don't know what you are trying to do... g-)
Thanks again.
-----Messaggio originale----- *Da:* Greger V. Teigre [mailto:greger@teigre.com] *Inviato:* mercoledì 6 settembre 2006 9.19 *A:* Zappasodi Daniele *Cc:* serusers@lists.iptel.org *Oggetto:* Re: [Serusers] Retransmission problem 1. DON'T have UA2 and SER on the same server. You are very likely to get problems because SER sees it's own IP address in a message destined for UA2 2. Don't use t_newtran and t_forward_nonack_uri unless you know exactly what you do (and probably not then either) 3. When having problems like that, use a pretested Getting Started config fil (http://iptel.org/ser/doc/gettingstarted). If you still have the problem, there is something external (like UA2 on same box as SER). Fix it and then compare the logic of your config file with the Getting Started reference config g-) Zappasodi Daniele wrote:Hello, I have a big problem with the retransmissions. In my tests sometimes the retransmission handler doesn't seem to work properly and it resends the INVITE after receiving a final response. Moreover it doesn't respect the time-out (instead wait 1 second it resends the packet after few decimal), but this is a minor item. An example: INVITE sip:31203 From 32201 UA1(32201) ---> SER ---> UA2(31203) INVITE UA1 ---> SER ---> UA2 Trying UA1 <--- SER 183 UA1 <--- SER <--- UA2 480 UA1 <--- SER <--- UA2 ACK UA1 ---> SER ---> UA2 ... Other call. After 0,5 msec SER sends again the first INVITE to UA2: INVITE SER ---> UA2 183 SER <--- UA2 etc. In the attached zipped file there are the syslog, the ser config file (only the relevant parts) and the ethereal captures related to this example. Some additional information: SER version is 0.9.2, compiled for arm. In my scenario SER and UA2 are on the same box. In LAN_capture.cap file there is the message flow between UA1 and SER, in lo_capture.cap between SER and UA2. Can someone explain me this behaviour? Maybe something wrong in my config file? Note that I use t_lookup_request, t_newtran, t_forward_nonack_uri in order to recognize retransmitted INVITE, could it be here the problem? thanks ********************************************************************** The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message inerror. ********************************************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message inerror.