But the save function doesn't care, that I have just inserted the Path. To get the Path inserted into the location table at save, I have to relay the request around localhost interface e.g. using t_relay("localhost");

Is there some better way to accomplish this?

This looks like a general OpenSER thing, that changes do not affect the current request processing, until the request is sent forward. Could someone provide me with some insight into this matter?

cheers, Bernie On Mon, 7 May 2007, Klaus Darilion wrote: > > > Bernie Hoeneisen wrote: >> Hi Klaus, Alex et al. >> >> I was thinking about the same problem. >> >> My setup has two redundant SIP Proxy/Registrar (OpenSER 1.1) Servers >> (P1 and P2), no additonal edge proxies. It uses either MySQL cluster >> or Master-Master Replication to exchange the state of the location >> table. >> >> For NAT Processing of REGISTER I use the Nathelper module, which >> writes the original (inside NAT) address to the 'contact' column and >> the information, where the REGISTER request was received from >> (outside NAT socket) goes to 'received' column of the location table. >> >> e.g.: >> contact column: sip:behoe@192.168.1.56:2051 >> received column: sip:130.56.88.20:5432 >> >> When an INVITE arrives at P1 (or P2), the 'contact' column will go to >> the R-URI and the 'received' value will be used as the next target of >> the INVITE request. >> >> INVITE requests that do not arrive at the proxy, where the UA has >> registered, have (depending on the NAT type) some likelihood to fail. >> >> Appart from that and as long as there is no path value saved in the >> location table, this work fine. If there is a path value, its content >> will go to the Route header field and the the request is sent to the >> topmost Route entry. Therefore it looses the information that was >> stored in the 'received' column....:-( > > Hi Bernie! > > Do you use the "received" features of path module? I think this should > solve your problems. > > http://www.openser.org/docs/modules/1.2.x/path#AEN82 and > http://www.openser.org/docs/modules/1.2.x/path#AEN123 > > regards > klaus > >> The preserve this information and to make sure that LL requests are >> routed via the proxy, the UA has registered to, I have some idea, >> that uses path. (Unfortunately not all of my UAs support >> 'outbound'...:-( ): >> >> When the REGISTER arrives at the Proxy P1, I would insert a Path >> header field with the address of P1 (i.e. the IP address and port of >> the proxy processing the request) >> >> Furthermore I would add a new header field parameter to the contact >> header field (let's call it "extsock" for the time being) containing >> the external NAT socket (i.e. the same information that also goes to >> 'received' column) >> >> e.g. >> Path: <sip:136.59.10.85:5060;lr>, >> Contact: >> <sip:behoe@192.168.1.56:2051;extsock=sip:130.56.88.20:5432;lr> >> >> This will then be stored in the 'path' / 'contact' columns of the >> location table at save(). >> >> When the INVITE arrives e.g. at P2, it does the location lookup: The >> Route header field will be populated with the content of the 'path' >> column and the R-URI will be rewritten with the 'contact' column. >> This means the request will be normally forwarded to P1 (topmost Route). >> >> The SIP INVITE looks e.g. as follows: >> >> INVITE sip:behoe@192.168.1.56:2051;extsock=sip:130.56.88.20:5432 >> SIP/2.0 >> Route:<sip:136.59.10.85:5060;lr> >> [...] >> >> After the request arrives at P1, it checks, whether there is an >> extsock parameter in the R-URI, and if yes, it uses its values as the >> next target of the request i.e. sip:130.56.88.20:5432 >> (Maybe P1 could even remove the extsock parameter from the R-URI at >> this stage to make some Nokia E-Series' phones happier...) >> >> My questions: >> - Is this idea feasible? Does it work in any case? Any issues with >> forking? >> - Could it easily be configured to OpenSER, or is there a change in >> the source code necessairy? >> - How much does it break SIP standards? ;-) >> >> Looking forward to your feedback. >> >> Have a nice weekend! >> >> cheers, >> Bernie >> >> >>> On Wednesday 02 May 2007 08:33, Klaus Darilion wrote: >>>> Hi Alex! >>>> >>>> Without having done this: You can configure the SIP proxies as load >>>> balancers too which distribute the load over all the proxy/registrars >>>> (including itself). >>> >>> I thought of that, but then every REGISTER needs to be forwarded to >>> another >>> proxy to get the path info right. This result in a great amount of >>> traffic >>> between the proxies and extra processing power. I want the REGISTER >>> request >>> to be handled on the first host it arrives on. Then only some >>> INVITE's need >>> to create inter-proxy traffic. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> Users(a)openser.org >> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users(a)openser.org > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >