26 Aug
2014
26 Aug
'14
8:30 a.m.
Hi,
Is it possible to run kamailio without database support (even dbtext)?
Where can I find minimal configuration example with minimal modules
set only for forwarding any requests/responses from one ip address to
another one?
--
WBR,
Eugene Prokopiev
26 Aug
26 Aug
9:44 a.m.
Is it possible to run kamailio without database
support (even dbtext)?
Yes, minimal stub may be looks like:
loadmodule "mi_fifo.so"
loadmodule "kex.so"
loadmodule "sl.so"
modparam("mi_fifo", "fifo_name", "/tmp/kamailio_fifo")
route {
sl_send_reply("503", "Server is not configured");
}
Which module/function need I use to simple forward any
request/responce to another sip server?
--
WBR,
Eugene Prokopiev
9:55 a.m.
Which module/function need I use to simple forward
any
request/responce to another sip server?
Is forward function enought for me -
http://www.kamailio.org/wiki/cookbooks/4.1.x/core#forward ? I tried to
use:
route {
$du = "sip:10.10.10.50:5060;transport=udp";
forward();
}
but I can't see any outgoing sip requests in tcpdump :(
--
WBR,
Eugene Prokopiev
11:42 a.m.
On 26/08/14 08:55, Eugene Prokopiev wrote:
The above config should work, but you need to load pv module.
If the IP is the same as the server, then watch also the loopback interface.
If doesn't work, add debug=3 as parameter to config and send the log
messages here (they are in syslog file).
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Next Kamailio Advanced Trainings 2014 - http://www.asipto.com
Sep 22-25, Berlin, Germany ::: Oct 15-17, San Francisco, USA
Which
module/function need I use to simple forward any
request/responce to another sip server?
Is forward function enought for me -
http://www.kamailio.org/wiki/cookbooks/4.1.x/core#forward ? I tried to
use:
route {
$du = "sip:10.10.10.50:5060;transport=udp";
forward();
}
but I can't see any outgoing sip requests in tcpdump :(
1:31 p.m.
Now I need to hide local topology: rewrite public ip addresses in
sip/sdp headers with internal kamailio address (10.10.10.7) for
incoming requests, rewrite internal softswitch address with public
kamailio ip address (10.7.7.7) and forward rtp packets. So, I have
rtpproxy running:
$ ps aux | grep rtpproxy
rtpproxy 12568 97.8 0.0 98588 988 ? Ssl 13:57 14:02
/usr/bin/rtpproxy -p /var/run/rtpproxy.pid -u rtpproxy -F -s
udp:127.0.0.1 22222 -l 10.7.7.7 10.10.10.7 -d DBUG LOG_LOCAL0 -u
rtpproxy
My kamailio configuration looks like:
loadmodule "mi_fifo.so"
loadmodule "kex.so"
loadmodule "tm.so"
loadmodule "sl.so"
loadmodule "pv.so"
loadmodule "nathelper.so"
loadmodule "rtpproxy.so"
modparam("mi_fifo", "fifo_name", "/tmp/kamailio_fifo")
modparam("nathelper", "received_avp", "$avp(RECEIVED)")
modparam("rtpproxy", "rtpproxy_sock",
"udp:127.0.0.1:22222")
route {
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("19")) {
if (method=="REGISTER") {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
fix_nated_contact();
}
}
rtpproxy_manage("cwei");
$du = "sip:10.10.10.50:5060;transport=udp";
forward();
}
onreply_route {
rtpproxy_manage("cwie");
fix_nated_contact();
return(1);
}
I see additional Via header with internal kamailio address in
forwarded REGISTER, but all other headers contains public ip
addresses.
What is wrong in my configuration and how to fix it?
--
WBR,
Eugene Prokopiev
3:18 p.m.
Each hop in the path of a SIP request has to add a Via header with its
own address.
If you want a different ip address in VIA than the local socket of
kamailio, then look at set_advertise_address() from core cookbook.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 26/08/14 12:31, Eugene Prokopiev wrote:
Now I need to hide local topology: rewrite public ip
addresses in
sip/sdp headers with internal kamailio address (10.10.10.7) for
incoming requests, rewrite internal softswitch address with public
kamailio ip address (10.7.7.7) and forward rtp packets. So, I have
rtpproxy running:
$ ps aux | grep rtpproxy
rtpproxy 12568 97.8 0.0 98588 988 ? Ssl 13:57 14:02
/usr/bin/rtpproxy -p /var/run/rtpproxy.pid -u rtpproxy -F -s
udp:127.0.0.1 22222 -l 10.7.7.7 10.10.10.7 -d DBUG LOG_LOCAL0 -u
rtpproxy
My kamailio configuration looks like:
loadmodule "mi_fifo.so"
loadmodule "kex.so"
loadmodule "tm.so"
loadmodule "sl.so"
loadmodule "pv.so"
loadmodule "nathelper.so"
loadmodule "rtpproxy.so"
modparam("mi_fifo", "fifo_name", "/tmp/kamailio_fifo")
modparam("nathelper", "received_avp", "$avp(RECEIVED)")
modparam("rtpproxy", "rtpproxy_sock",
"udp:127.0.0.1:22222")
route {
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("19")) {
if (method=="REGISTER") {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
fix_nated_contact();
}
}
rtpproxy_manage("cwei");
$du = "sip:10.10.10.50:5060;transport=udp";
forward();
}
onreply_route {
rtpproxy_manage("cwie");
fix_nated_contact();
return(1);
}
I see additional Via header with internal kamailio address in
forwarded REGISTER, but all other headers contains public ip
addresses.
What is wrong in my configuration and how to fix it?
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Next Kamailio Advanced Trainings 2014 - http://www.asipto.com
Sep 22-25, Berlin, Germany ::: Oct 15-17, San Francisco, USA
3:46 p.m.
If you want a different ip address in VIA than the
local socket of kamailio,
then look at set_advertise_address() from core cookbook.
No, it is more important to rewrite To and From headers to source
interface ip address for proxied requests and responses. What is the
right way to do it? Where can I find simple example to proxy requests
from public network to private one?
--
WBR,
Eugene Prokopiev
4:46 p.m.
Is it possible at all to do double topology hiding with Kamailio? SIP
devices with public ip addresses must not know private softswitch
address and softswitch must not know any public ip address. Softswitch
must work only with Kamailio private address.
--
WBR,
Eugene Prokopiev
4:48 p.m.
Apart from topoh module (an experimental hack in my opinion), basically no. It's a
proxy. Proxies are highly transparent. Logical call leg A in, logical call leg A out.
There's no topology to hide, really.
On 26 August 2014 09:46:29 GMT-04:00, Eugene Prokopiev <enp(a)itx.ru> wrote:
Is it possible at all to do double topology hiding with
Kamailio? SIP
devices with public ip addresses must not know private softswitch
address and softswitch must not know any public ip address. Softswitch
must work only with Kamailio private address.
--
Sent from my mobile, and thus lacking in the refinement one might expect from a fully
fledged keyboard.
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
235 E Ponce de Leon Ave
Suite 106
Decatur, GA 30030
United States
Tel: +1-678-954-0671
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com
4:52 p.m.
On 26/08/14 15:48, Alex Balashov wrote:
Apart from topoh module (an experimental hack in my
opinion)
Why experimental? It is used in production in many places.
Daniel
, basically no. It's a proxy. Proxies are highly
transparent. Logical call leg A in, logical call leg A out. There's no topology to
hide, really.
On 26 August 2014 09:46:29 GMT-04:00, Eugene Prokopiev <enp(a)itx.ru> wrote:
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Next Kamailio Advanced Trainings 2014 - http://www.asipto.com
Sep 22-25, Berlin, Germany ::: Oct 15-17, San Francisco, USA
Is it possible at all to do double topology
hiding with Kamailio? SIP
devices with public ip addresses must not know private softswitch
address and softswitch must not know any public ip address. Softswitch
must work only with Kamailio private address.
--
Sent from my mobile, and thus lacking in the refinement one might expect from a fully
fledged keyboard.
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
235 E Ponce de Leon Ave
Suite 106
Decatur, GA 30030
United States
Tel: +1-678-954-0671
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com
_______________________________________________
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
4:54 p.m.
On 26 August 2014 09:52:59 GMT-04:00, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 26/08/14 15:48, Alex Balashov wrote:
Does it still have the bug where the IP of the bound interface cannot be used as the topoh
spoof address?
--
Sent from my mobile, and thus lacking in the refinement one might expect from a fully
fledged keyboard.
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
235 E Ponce de Leon Ave
Suite 106
Decatur, GA 30030
United States
Tel: +1-678-954-0671
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com
Apart from topoh module (an experimental hack in
my opinion)
Why experimental? It is used in production in many places.
4:58 p.m.
On 26/08/14 15:54, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 26 August 2014 09:52:59 GMT-04:00, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
That was from the initial design. It is also like you cannot
use the IP
of caller or callee. You can use 127.0.0.2 without issues, for example,
or other 'non-existent' ip.
Daniel
On 26/08/14 15:48, Alex Balashov wrote:
Does it still have the bug where the IP of the bound interface cannot be used as the
topoh spoof address? Apart from topoh module (an experimental hack in
my opinion)
Why experimental? It is used in production in many places.
--
Sent from my mobile, and thus lacking in the refinement one might expect from a fully
fledged keyboard.
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
235 E Ponce de Leon Ave
Suite 106
Decatur, GA 30030
United States
Tel: +1-678-954-0671
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Next Kamailio Advanced Trainings 2014 - http://www.asipto.com
Sep 22-25, Berlin, Germany ::: Oct 15-17, San Francisco, USA
7:41 p.m.
Apart from
topoh module (an experimental hack in my opinion)
Why experimental? It is used in production in many places.
7:48 p.m.
On 26/08/14 18:41, Eugene Prokopiev wrote:
How it
can be used? Mask IP must be different than SIP server local
IP, so it looks like impossible to rewrite public IP address to server
local IP address :( The module is not for hiding/changing the ip address of
kamailio server.
That is known (and must stay there for routing) by both sides of the call.
The module is to hide the IP addresses of the other nodes in the path of
the call, so, when A is calling B, none of them know the real ip of the
other. But obviously A and B must know the ip of kamailio.
The way it works with topoh: it replaces the ips of A and B with a
'fake' IP -- the fake IP just have to conform with the IP address format
and not to be server IP. It can be a non-public-routable IP, because it
is used just as a place holder in the SIP headers, to stay conformant
with SIP grammar. Therefore you can use there an IP such as 127.0.0.44
(which is not allocated anywhere and not routable).
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Next Kamailio Advanced Trainings 2014 - http://www.asipto.com
Sep 22-25, Berlin, Germany ::: Oct 15-17, San Francisco, USA
Apart from topoh module (an experimental hack in my
opinion)
Why experimental? It is used in production in many places.
9:58 a.m.
I've read your article about Kamailio as an SBC
and found uac module
description with uac_restore_from() and uac_restore_to(). It looks
like suitable for me, so I'll try to use it.
uac_restore_from() and uac_restore_to() works fine, but next I need to
modify ip address in SDP headers in responce - so it will be more
suitable to use SEMS or FreeSWITCH.
--
WBR,
Eugene Prokopiev
26 Aug
26 Aug
4:50 p.m.
On 26 Aug 2014, at 15:46, Eugene Prokopiev <enp(a)itx.ru> wrote:
Is it possible at all to do double topology hiding
with Kamailio? SIP
devices with public ip addresses must not know private softswitch
address and softswitch must not know any public ip address. Softswitch
must work only with Kamailio private address.
GRUU?
/O
4:52 p.m.
On Aug 26, 2014, at 9:46 AM, Eugene Prokopiev <enp(a)itx.ru> wrote:
Is it possible at all to do double topology hiding
with Kamailio? SIP
devices with public ip addresses must not know private softswitch
address and softswitch must not know any public ip address. Softswitch
must work only with Kamailio private address.
You are describing a b2bua, back to back user agent. Freeswitch is what I use.
There is SEMS and of course asterisk. I don't recommend asterisk.
--FC
7:45 p.m.
You are describing a b2bua, back to back user agent.
Freeswitch is what I use. There is SEMS and of course asterisk. I don't recommend
asterisk.
I have some experience with FreeSWITCH but have no one with SEMS. Have
SEMS any advantages over FreeSWITCH for topology hiding?
--
WBR,
Eugene Prokopiev
7:48 p.m.
On 08/26/2014 12:45 PM, Eugene Prokopiev wrote:
I have some experience with FreeSWITCH but have no one
with SEMS. Have
SEMS any advantages over FreeSWITCH for topology hiding?
More narrow and specialised use-cases, so you don't have to deal with
stripping it of PBX and miscellaneous application features. It's more of
a dedicated B2BUA (with its sbc module), in this case.
--
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
Tel: +1-678-954-0670
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/
Please be kind to the English language:
http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/232906
27 Aug
27 Aug
12:48 p.m.
Have SEMS any
advantages over FreeSWITCH for topology hiding?
More narrow and specialised use-cases, so you don't have to deal with
stripping it of PBX and miscellaneous application features. It's more of a
dedicated B2BUA (with its sbc module), in this case.
4:28 p.m.
On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:48 AM, Eugene Prokopiev <enp(a)itx.ru> wrote:
I tried to use SEMS but I've got error, which was reported about 2
years ago without any decision -
http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/sems/2014-August/004451.html
You will have no problem doing this on Freeswitch. Stripping down FS from
it's default config is not hard. I like to rewrite the entire config organizing it
for the intended purpose. Thinking through what you want to do, write it down and then
rewrite the config. Just because FS has lots of features doesn't mean you need to use
them. It's not hard to disable them.
--FC
Have SEMS any advantages over FreeSWITCH for topology
hiding?
More narrow and specialised use-cases, so you don't have to deal with
stripping it of PBX and miscellaneous application features. It's more of a
dedicated B2BUA (with its sbc module), in this case.
3741
days inactive
3742
days old
23 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Alex Balashov -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Eugene Prokopiev -
Frank Carmickle -
Olle E. Johansson