13 May
2014
13 May
'14
5:36 p.m.
Hi,
we have a setup, where we have a TCP loadbalancer, which converts the
requests from attached devices using TCP into UDP for the rest of our
setup. This loadbalancer has a service IP, and additionally the host IP, it
listens to different addresses.
Example:
Host IP is: 1.1.1.1
Service IP is: 2.2.2.2
Device is at: 5.5.5.5
Proxy: 9.9.9.9
Gateway: 8.8.8.8
Kamailio listen IPs:
tcp:1.1.1.1:15060 (used just for XMLRPC querys)
tcp:2.2.2.2:5060
udp:1.1.1.1:5062
udp:2.2.2.2:5060
The Host IP should only be used for some management functions, not for
routing.
We've had the problem at first, that when converting from TCP to UDP,
Kamailio did not use the same IP but instead the first configured one. I
got rid of that by using force_send_socket.
Now I'm calling a registered device. Since the registered device is saved
with a path, the request comes in via UDP with the following parameters:
U 2014/05/13 16:15:31.225132 9.9.9.9:5060 -> 2.2.2.2:5060
INVITE sip:user@5.5.5.5:5060;uniq=F373C9746E87D6271688292199F83;transport=tcp
SIP/2.0
Record-Route: <sip:9.9.9.9;lr>
Record-Route: <sip:2.2.2.2;lr;ftag=as458ff869>
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
9.9.9.9;branch=z9hG4bK17ec.ea7c017baba4072b27c5b0b9daa23346.0
Route: <sip:2.2.2.2;lr;received=sip:5.5.5.5:4956%3Btransport%3Dtcp>
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
2.2.2.2;branch=z9hG4bK17ec.7db07192e57ae94739d5c3e1444d7ef3.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 8.8.8.8:5060;branch=z9hG4bK5ba05442
Up until now everything looks good. But this is what the loadbalancer sends
out:
T 2014/05/13 16:15:31.226987 2.2.2.2:5060 -> 5.5.5.5:4956 [A]
INVITE sip:user@5.5.5.5:5060;uniq=F373C9746E87D6271688292199F83;transport=tcp
SIP/2.0
Record-Route: <sip:1.1.1.1:15060;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr;ftag=as458ff869>
Record-Route: <sip:2.2.2.2;r2=on;lr;ftag=as458ff869>
Record-Route: <sip:9.9.9.9;lr>
Record-Route: <sip:2.2.2.2;lr;ftag=as458ff869>
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 1.1.1.1:15060
;branch=z9hG4bK17ec.99e285f5a9e03594d3f7ae6048d1868d.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
9.9.9.9;branch=z9hG4bK17ec.ea7c017baba4072b27c5b0b9daa23346.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
2.2.2.2;branch=z9hG4bK17ec.7db07192e57ae94739d5c3e1444d7ef3.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 8.8.8.8:5060;branch=z9hG4bK5ba05442
As you can see, the the packet is sent out through the correct socket. But
in RR and Via header it advertises the other TCP socket. This breaks BYEs
later on.
Is there some way, I can influence, which IP and port Kamailio writes into
those headers? Or is this a bug, that Kamailio doesn't check the sending
socket correctly?
Best Regards,
Sebastian
13 May
13 May
5:39 p.m.
Hello Sebastian,
On 05/13/2014 10:36 AM, Sebastian Damm wrote:
Is there some way, I can influence, which IP and port
Kamailio writes
into those headers? Or is this a bug, that Kamailio doesn't check the
sending socket correctly?
Have a look at replacing your record_route() call with
record_route_preset():
http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/rr.html#idp114624
As for the advertised address more generally, i.e. in Via, have a look
at this core parameter:
http://www.kamailio.org/wiki/cookbooks/4.1.x/core#advertised_address
-- Alex
--
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
235 E Ponce de Leon Ave
Suite 106
Decatur, GA 30030
United States
Tel: +1-678-954-0670
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/
6:17 p.m.
Hi Alex,
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Alex Balashov <abalashov(a)evaristesys.com>wrote;wrote:
Have a look at replacing your record_route() call
with
record_route_preset():
http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/rr.html#idp114624
As for the advertised address more generally, i.e. in Via, have a look at
this core parameter:
http://www.kamailio.org/wiki/cookbooks/4.1.x/core#advertised_address
Thanks. I just added the advertised_address parameter as a test, now
Kamailio puts the external IP into Via and RR, but still uses the port
15060 from the other socket.
However, the docs say:
"If empty or not set (default value) the socket address from where the
request will be sent is used."
This is what I would expect, but this is not what's happening. It uses a
different socket for the Via and RR header than it actually uses for
sending the request out.
I worked around this problem by placing the listen line for the unused TCP
connection after the used one, and now it looks a lot better. But I still
think, that the Via and RR headers should never differ from the actually
used socket, when not using the set_advertised_address function.
Best Regards,
Sebastian
6:20 p.m.
Sebastian,
There is also an 'advertised_port' parameter, which might be of aid to
you here.
--
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
235 E Ponce de Leon Ave
Suite 106
Decatur, GA 30030
United States
Tel: +1-678-954-0670
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/
7:02 p.m.
Hi Alex,
yes, I've seen it. But I don't want to use it since I can't set it
generally, because this Loadbalancer also serves TLS, and TLS uses a
different port.
Any comments about this difference between the sending socket vs. the
advertised socket when not configured specially?
Best Regards,
Sebastian
<http://www.sipgate.co.uk>
9:38 p.m.
Hello,
do you have mhomed=1? In that case, kernel routing rules are returning
what interface is the one to use -- kamailio does some temporary sockets
to retrieve the interface from kernel.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 13/05/14 18:02, Sebastian Damm wrote:
Hi Alex,
yes, I've seen it. But I don't want to use it since I can't set it
generally, because this Loadbalancer also serves TLS, and TLS uses a
different port.
Any comments about this difference between the sending socket vs. the
advertised socket when not configured specially?
Best Regards,
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)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
15 May
15 May
3:04 p.m.
Hi Daniel,
unless mhomed is set to 1 by default, I don't have it set. At which time is
the IP for RR and Via headers determined? Before sending out? It looks to
me that it is determined a lot earlier, thus not using the value from the
socket the packet actually gets sent out at the end.
Best Regards,
Sebastian
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
do you have mhomed=1? In that case, kernel routing rules are returning
what interface is the one to use -- kamailio does some temporary sockets to
retrieve the interface from kernel.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 13/05/14 18:02, Sebastian Damm wrote:
Hi Alex,
yes, I've seen it. But I don't want to use it since I can't set it
generally, because this Loadbalancer also serves TLS, and TLS uses a
different port.
Any comments about this difference between the sending socket vs. the
advertised socket when not configured specially?
Best Regards,
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
listsr-users@lists.sip-router.orghttp://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.comhttp://twitter.com/#!/miconda -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
<http://www.sipgate.co.uk>
3847
days inactive
3849
days old
6 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Alex Balashov -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Sebastian Damm