[Serusers] Ignored registrations? - sr-users

2 Jul 2003

      I'm having a small problem with a phone registration at a customer's
site.  The majority of the phones register with no problem.  The ones
that register correctly are Snom 200s, while the one I'm having problems
with is a Cisco.  The registration request I see in my ngrep log from
the Cisco is:
REGISTER sip:SIP000BBEF2DF4C SIP/2.0..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
   172.21.20.200:5060..  From: sip:Line1@SIP000BBEF2DF4C..To:
   sip:Line1@SIP000BBEF2DF4C..Call-ID:
   000bbef2-df4c000c-223725a3-671cea85@172.21.20.200..CSeq: 101
   REGISTER..Contact: sip:Line1@172.21.20.200:5060..Expires:
   3600..Content-Length: 0....
While a Snom's request looks like this:
REGISTER sip:172.21.30.50 SIP/2.0..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
   172.21.20.36:5060;branch=z9hG4bK-zqvjm58v73fd;rport..Max-Forwards:
   70..From: "IC36" sip:IC36@172.21.30.50;tag=26kqteejq4..To: "IC36"
   sip:IC36@172.21.30.50..Call-ID:
   3ef763ebf18c-ga88nc7dymyf@172.21.20.36..User-Agent:
   snom200-1.15r..CSeq: 1581 REGISTER..Route:
   sip:172.21.30.50..Contact:
   sip:IC36@172.21.20.36:5060;line=1..Expires: 600..Content-Length:
   0....
There's never a response of any kind from the SER proxy to the Cisco's
request.  I noticed that the Cisco doesn't enlcose the From or To
addresses in <>'s, while the Snom and other SIP devices at the location
do, but I'm not sure that's the problem.
Ideas?
-- 
Jamin W. Collins

This is the typical unix way of doing things: you string together lots
of very specific tools to accomplish larger tasks. -- Vineet Kumar