21 Dec
2006
21 Dec
'06
1:12 a.m.
Scenario:
I have two test phones setup to a SER server. The two phones are
192.168.2.133 and 192.168.2.101. My server is 192.168.2.1. I can call from
.101 to .133 fine. When I try to place a call from .133 this is what I get.
0(2734) SIP Request:
0(2734) method: <INVITE>
0(2734) uri: <sip:1001@192.168.2.1>
0(2734) version: <SIP/2.0>
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=1
0(2734) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK7e2902f2a>; state=16
0(2734) end of header reached, state=5
0(2734) parse_headers: Via found, flags=1
0(2734) parse_headers: this is the first via
0(2734) After parse_msg...
0(2734) preparing to run routing scripts...
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=128
0(2734) DEBUG:maxfwd:is_maxfwd_present: value = 70
0(2734) DBG:maxfwd:process_maxfwd_header: value 70 decreased to 16
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=8
0(2734) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=586
0(2734) end of header reached, state=9
0(2734) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [29]; uri=[sip:1001@192.168.2.1]
0(2734) DEBUG: to body [1001 <sip:1001@192.168.2.1>
]
0(2734) DEBUG: add_param: tag=4d4e374f5ebe6ab
0(2734) end of header reached, state=29
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=256
0(2734) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1338505295> <INVITE>
0(2734) is_preloaded: Yes
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==13 && [192.168.2.136]
== [192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) after_loose: Topmost route URI: 'sip:192.168.2.136:5060;lr' is me
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=256
0(2734) found end of header
0(2734) find_next_route: No next Route HF found
0(2734) after_loose: No next URI found
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==13 && [192.168.2.1] ==
[192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==13 && [192.168.2.1] ==
[192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) check_self: host != me
0(2734) DEBUG: t_newtran: msg id=45 , global msg id=43 , T on
entrance=0xffffffff
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=-1
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=60
0(2734) t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=15747, isACK=0
0(2734) DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matching failed
0(2734) DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no transaction found
0(2734) SER: new INVITE
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=-1
0(2734) check_via_address(192.168.2.133, 192.168.2.133, 0)
0(2734) WARNING:vqm_resize: resize(0) called
0(2734) DEBUG: reply sent out. buf=0x8104e98: SIP/2.0 1...,
shmem=0xb6145728: SIP/2.0 1
0(2734) DEBUG: _reply_light: finished
0(2734) DEBUG: mk_proxy: doing DNS lookup...
0(2734) check_via_address(192.168.2.133, 192.168.2.133, 0)
0(2734) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[4]: 0xb6143eb8
0(2734) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[0]: 0xb6143ec8
0(2734) SER: new transaction fwd'ed
0(2734) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list (nil)
0(2734) receive_msg: cleaning up
1(2737) DEBUG: timer routine:4,tl=0xb6143eb8 next=(nil)
1(2737) DEBUG: retransmission_handler : request resending (t=0xb6143da0,
INVITE si ... )
1(2737) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[5]: 0xb6143eb8
1(2737) DEBUG: retransmission_handler : done
0(2734) SIP Request:
0(2734) method: <CANCEL>
0(2734) uri: <sip:1001@192.168.2.1>
0(2734) version: <SIP/2.0>
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=1
0(2734) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK7e2902f2a>; state=16
0(2734) end of header reached, state=5
0(2734) parse_headers: Via found, flags=1
0(2734) parse_headers: this is the first via
0(2734) After parse_msg...
0(2734) preparing to run routing scripts...
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=128
0(2734) DEBUG:maxfwd:is_maxfwd_present: value = 70
0(2734) DBG:maxfwd:process_maxfwd_header: value 70 decreased to 16
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=8
0(2734) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=0
0(2734) end of header reached, state=9
0(2734) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [29]; uri=[sip:1001@192.168.2.1]
0(2734) DEBUG: to body [1001 <sip:1001@192.168.2.1>
]
0(2734) DEBUG: add_param: tag=4d4e374f5ebe6ab
0(2734) end of header reached, state=29
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=256
0(2734) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1338505295> <CANCEL>
0(2734) is_preloaded: Yes
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==13 && [192.168.2.136]
== [192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) after_loose: Topmost route URI: 'sip:192.168.2.136:5060;lr' is me
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=256
0(2734) found end of header
0(2734) find_next_route: No next Route HF found
0(2734) after_loose: No next URI found
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==13 && [192.168.2.1] ==
[192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==13 && [192.168.2.1] ==
[192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) check_self: host != me
0(2734) DEBUG: t_newtran: msg id=46 , global msg id=45 , T on
entrance=0xffffffff
Bill Hissong
22 Dec
22 Dec
5:30 p.m.
For some reason your SER believes that 192.168.2.136 is its IP address, but
192.168.2.1 is not its IP address. My guess: you configured aliases in your
config wrong.
Second problem: the INVITE seems to contain a Route header with 192.168.136 in
it. Why is this header there? Fix the configuration/setup of your phone to
remove this "wrong" header.
Nils
On Thursday 21 December 2006 00:12, Bill wrote:
Scenario:
I have two test phones setup to a SER server. The two phones are
192.168.2.133 and 192.168.2.101. My server is 192.168.2.1. I can call from
.101 to .133 fine. When I try to place a call from .133 this is what I get.
0(2734) SIP Request:
0(2734) method: <INVITE>
0(2734) uri: <sip:1001@192.168.2.1>
0(2734) version: <SIP/2.0>
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=1
0(2734) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK7e2902f2a>; state=16
0(2734) end of header reached, state=5
0(2734) parse_headers: Via found, flags=1
0(2734) parse_headers: this is the first via
0(2734) After parse_msg...
0(2734) preparing to run routing scripts...
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=128
0(2734) DEBUG:maxfwd:is_maxfwd_present: value = 70
0(2734) DBG:maxfwd:process_maxfwd_header: value 70 decreased to 16
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=8
0(2734) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=586
0(2734) end of header reached, state=9
0(2734) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [29]; uri=[sip:1001@192.168.2.1]
0(2734) DEBUG: to body [1001 <sip:1001@192.168.2.1>
]
0(2734) DEBUG: add_param: tag=4d4e374f5ebe6ab
0(2734) end of header reached, state=29
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=256
0(2734) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1338505295> <INVITE>
0(2734) is_preloaded: Yes
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==13 && [192.168.2.136]
== [192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) after_loose: Topmost route URI: 'sip:192.168.2.136:5060;lr' is me
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=256
0(2734) found end of header
0(2734) find_next_route: No next Route HF found
0(2734) after_loose: No next URI found
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==13 && [192.168.2.1] ==
[192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==13 && [192.168.2.1] ==
[192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) check_self: host != me
0(2734) DEBUG: t_newtran: msg id=45 , global msg id=43 , T on
entrance=0xffffffff
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=-1
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=60
0(2734) t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=15747, isACK=0
0(2734) DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matching failed
0(2734) DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no transaction found
0(2734) SER: new INVITE
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=-1
0(2734) check_via_address(192.168.2.133, 192.168.2.133, 0)
0(2734) WARNING:vqm_resize: resize(0) called
0(2734) DEBUG: reply sent out. buf=0x8104e98: SIP/2.0 1...,
shmem=0xb6145728: SIP/2.0 1
0(2734) DEBUG: _reply_light: finished
0(2734) DEBUG: mk_proxy: doing DNS lookup...
0(2734) check_via_address(192.168.2.133, 192.168.2.133, 0)
0(2734) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[4]: 0xb6143eb8
0(2734) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[0]: 0xb6143ec8
0(2734) SER: new transaction fwd'ed
0(2734) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list (nil)
0(2734) receive_msg: cleaning up
1(2737) DEBUG: timer routine:4,tl=0xb6143eb8 next=(nil)
1(2737) DEBUG: retransmission_handler : request resending (t=0xb6143da0,
INVITE si ... )
1(2737) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[5]: 0xb6143eb8
1(2737) DEBUG: retransmission_handler : done
0(2734) SIP Request:
0(2734) method: <CANCEL>
0(2734) uri: <sip:1001@192.168.2.1>
0(2734) version: <SIP/2.0>
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=1
0(2734) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK7e2902f2a>; state=16
0(2734) end of header reached, state=5
0(2734) parse_headers: Via found, flags=1
0(2734) parse_headers: this is the first via
0(2734) After parse_msg...
0(2734) preparing to run routing scripts...
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=128
0(2734) DEBUG:maxfwd:is_maxfwd_present: value = 70
0(2734) DBG:maxfwd:process_maxfwd_header: value 70 decreased to 16
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=8
0(2734) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=0
0(2734) end of header reached, state=9
0(2734) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [29]; uri=[sip:1001@192.168.2.1]
0(2734) DEBUG: to body [1001 <sip:1001@192.168.2.1>
]
0(2734) DEBUG: add_param: tag=4d4e374f5ebe6ab
0(2734) end of header reached, state=29
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=256
0(2734) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1338505295> <CANCEL>
0(2734) is_preloaded: Yes
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==13 && [192.168.2.136]
== [192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) after_loose: Topmost route URI: 'sip:192.168.2.136:5060;lr' is me
0(2734) parse_headers: flags=256
0(2734) found end of header
0(2734) find_next_route: No next Route HF found
0(2734) after_loose: No next URI found
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==13 && [192.168.2.1] ==
[192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==13 && [192.168.2.1] ==
[192.168.2.136]
0(2734) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060
0(2734) check_self: host != me
0(2734) DEBUG: t_newtran: msg id=46 , global msg id=45 , T on
entrance=0xffffffff
Bill Hissong
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--
Dipl. Inform. Nils Ohlmeier
Quality Assurance Manager
iptelorg GmbH
Am Borsigturm 11
13507 Berlin
Germany
nils.ohlmeier(a)iptelorg.com
www.iptelorg.com
T +49-30-325132 22
T +49-700-IPTELORG
F +49-30-6908 8248
11:35 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] xlog level and loglevel iin ser.cfg
Hi
How does the log level in the module xlog module corresponds to the
loglevel parameter defined in the ser.cfg file?
Is there any relation?
Best
tomasz
23 Dec
23 Dec
12:17 a.m.
New subject: [Serusers] xlog level and loglevel iin ser.cfg
Yes, you won't see messages with level higher than debug=<debug> level.
E.g. xlog("L_INFO","INFO"); won't output anything unless debug=3
or
higher is set (or ser -ddd executed).
L_ALERT =-3
L_CRIT =-2
L_ERR =-1
- all these are <0 so you will see then anytime (you can't set debug<0)
L_WARN =1
L_NOTICE =2
L_INFO =3
L_DBG =4
Note, that only the third letter is used, so you can put
xlog("L_D","DEBUG");
Michal
On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 22:35 +0100, TZieleniewski wrote:
Hi
How does the log level in the module xlog module corresponds to the
loglevel parameter defined in the ser.cfg file?
Is there any relation?
Best
tomasz
6545
days inactive
6547
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Bill -
Michal Matyska -
Nils Ohlmeier -
TZieleniewski