That sample configuration is OK. Your problem must be searched elsewhere.

On Aug 6, 2004, at 12:51 PM, Sean Lowry wrote:

Umm very strange i used the example.cfg and inside there it has the fix_contact in the registration, and in the client_nat_test and also in te onreply_route.

so what is the correct format if this is wrong.

Sean

...

-----Original Message----- From: Adrian Georgescu [SMTP:ag@ag-projects.com] Sent: 06 August 2004 11:55 To: dave@fuuz.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: [Serusers] mediaproxy + ser0.8.14 problem

See http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2004-August/010420.html

---

hi all,

Have been trying to get media proxy to work with 0.8.14 and am not having a huge amount of joy. Basically the route processing seems to be fine, but as soon as ser attempts to actually pass traffic through media proxy it crashes out!

Aug 5 15:30:13 sip /sbin/ser[3066]: NAT: Request from RFC Private IP Detected --> mediaproxy flagged

Aug 5 15:30:13 sip /sbin/ser[3066]: VOICEMAIL: VM user detected --> activating VM Flag

Aug 5 15:30:13 sip /sbin/ser[3066]: NAT: Caller is NAT'd (destination offline) --> enable reply processing

Aug 5 15:30:13 sip /sbin/ser[3066]: NAT: Invite received --> enabling media proxy

Aug 5 15:30:13 sip /sbin/ser[3052]: child process 3066 exited by a signal 11

Aug 5 15:30:13 sip /sbin/ser[3052]: core was not generated

Aug 5 15:30:13 sip /sbin/ser[3052]: INFO: terminating due to SIGCHLD

Aug 5 15:30:13 sip /sbin/ser[3186]: INFO: signal 15 received

Aug 5 15:30:13 sip /sbin/ser[3193]: INFO: signal 15 received

(the same is true if the destination is online as well).

I may have a problem with symmetric/asymmetric clients, but I don't think ser should actually crash like that... does anyone have any ideas?

Dave << File: ATT13254.txt >>