3 Apr
2020
3 Apr
'20
1:21 p.m.
Hi. Well issue already described there :
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/2271
I will be really happy if somebody point me what exactly i have to do to
route 404 answer from Registar to UA.
If i understand right, in moment when registrar generate 404 i have to
see in log message which generated inside onreply_route[REPLYROUTE]
but in current moment i not see it and 404 not transmitted to UA. And it
just silently ignored by Kamailio.
In case if i am right and this is a bug in Kamailio please point me what
words i have to use to prove that this is really bug.
In current moment routing config looks like :
request_route
{
# per request initial checks
route(REQINIT);
route(CATCH_CANCEL);
route(RR_PARSE);
route(REGISTRATION);
xlog("L_INFO", "Initial relay packet\n");
$du = "sip:10.34.64.2:5060";
route(FORWARD);
# update $du to set the destination address for proxying
exit;
}
route[CATCH_CANCEL]
{
if (is_method("CANCEL") == true)
{
if (t_check_trans() == true)
{
route(FORWARD);
}
sl_reply("500", "Internal Server Error");
drop;
}
}
route[RR_PARSE]
{
if(loose_route() == true )
{
xlog("L_INFO", "RR-enforced\n");
append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n");
route(FORWARD);
} else
{
xlog("L_INFO", "RR simple\n");
record_route();
}
}
route[REGISTRATION]
{
if(is_method("REGISTER") == true)
{
add_path_received();
append_hf("Supported: path\r\n");
xlog("L_INFO", "GOT REGISTER\n");
}
}
# Per SIP request initial checks
route[REQINIT]
{
if($ua =~ "friendly-scanner|sipcli|VaxSIPUserAgent") {
# silent drop for scanners - uncomment next line if
want to reply
# sl_send_reply("200", "OK");
exit;
}
if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) {
sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops");
exit;
}
if(is_method("OPTIONS") && uri==myself && $rU==$null)
{
sl_send_reply("200","Keepalive");
exit;
}
if(!sanity_check("1511", "7")) {
xlog("Malformed SIP message from $si:$sp\n");
exit;
}
}
route[FORWARD]
{
t_on_failure("FAILROUTE");
t_on_reply("REPLYROUTE");
if(t_relay() <= 0)
{
sl_reply_error();
}
drop;
}
onreply_route[REPLYROUTE]
{
xlog("Reply SIP message from $si:$sp\n");
if (t_check_trans() == false)
{
drop;
}
}
failure_route[FAILROUTE]
{
xlog("Reply Fail SIP message from $si:$sp\n");
}
4 Apr
4 Apr
7:57 p.m.
I will be really happy if somebody point me what
exactly i have to do
to route 404 answer from Registar to UA
Do exactly this: *nothing*. They'll be route back based on VIA, may be set
contact alias for certain status codes, if need be.
Good luck.
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 2:37 AM fuxfwgc4a2i1gr <fuxfwgc4a2i1gr(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi. Well issue already described there :
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/2271
I will be really happy if somebody point me what exactly i have to do to
route 404 answer from Registar to UA.
If i understand right, in moment when registrar generate 404 i have to
see in log message which generated inside onreply_route[REPLYROUTE]
but in current moment i not see it and 404 not transmitted to UA. And it
just silently ignored by Kamailio.
In case if i am right and this is a bug in Kamailio please point me what
words i have to use to prove that this is really bug.
In current moment routing config looks like :
request_route
{
# per request initial checks
route(REQINIT);
route(CATCH_CANCEL);
route(RR_PARSE);
route(REGISTRATION);
xlog("L_INFO", "Initial relay packet\n");
$du = "sip:10.34.64.2:5060";
route(FORWARD);
# update $du to set the destination address for proxying
exit;
}
route[CATCH_CANCEL]
{
if (is_method("CANCEL") == true)
{
if (t_check_trans() == true)
{
route(FORWARD);
}
sl_reply("500", "Internal Server Error");
drop;
}
}
route[RR_PARSE]
{
if(loose_route() == true )
{
xlog("L_INFO", "RR-enforced\n");
append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n");
route(FORWARD);
} else
{
xlog("L_INFO", "RR simple\n");
record_route();
}
}
route[REGISTRATION]
{
if(is_method("REGISTER") == true)
{
add_path_received();
append_hf("Supported: path\r\n");
xlog("L_INFO", "GOT REGISTER\n");
}
}
# Per SIP request initial checks
route[REQINIT]
{
if($ua =~ "friendly-scanner|sipcli|VaxSIPUserAgent") {
# silent drop for scanners - uncomment next line if
want to reply
# sl_send_reply("200", "OK");
exit;
}
if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) {
sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops");
exit;
}
if(is_method("OPTIONS") && uri==myself && $rU==$null)
{
sl_send_reply("200","Keepalive");
exit;
}
if(!sanity_check("1511", "7")) {
xlog("Malformed SIP message from $si:$sp\n");
exit;
}
}
route[FORWARD]
{
t_on_failure("FAILROUTE");
t_on_reply("REPLYROUTE");
if(t_relay() <= 0)
{
sl_reply_error();
}
drop;
}
onreply_route[REPLYROUTE]
{
xlog("Reply SIP message from $si:$sp\n");
if (t_check_trans() == false)
{
drop;
}
}
failure_route[FAILROUTE]
{
xlog("Reply Fail SIP message from $si:$sp\n");
}
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
5 Apr
5 Apr
1:28 a.m.
Also, as per Daniel’s advice, don’t use
If( is_method(“CANCEL”)==true )
Just use
If( is_method(“CANCEL”) )
Or negating it:
If( !is_method(“CANCEL”) )
Regards,
David
On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 at 16:59, Sergiu Pojoga <pojogas(a)gmail.com> wrote:
--
Regards,
David Villasmil
email: david.villasmil.work(a)gmail.com
phone: +34669448337
I will be
really happy if somebody point me what exactly i have to do
to route 404 answer
from Registar to UA
Do exactly this: *nothing*. They'll be route back based on VIA, may be
set contact alias for certain status codes, if need be.
Good luck.
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 2:37 AM fuxfwgc4a2i1gr <fuxfwgc4a2i1gr(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi. Well issue already described there :
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/2271
I will be really happy if somebody point me what exactly i have to do to
route 404 answer from Registar to UA.
If i understand right, in moment when registrar generate 404 i have to
see in log message which generated inside onreply_route[REPLYROUTE]
but in current moment i not see it and 404 not transmitted to UA. And it
just silently ignored by Kamailio.
In case if i am right and this is a bug in Kamailio please point me what
words i have to use to prove that this is really bug.
In current moment routing config looks like :
request_route
{
# per request initial checks
route(REQINIT);
route(CATCH_CANCEL);
route(RR_PARSE);
route(REGISTRATION);
xlog("L_INFO", "Initial relay packet\n");
$du = "sip:10.34.64.2:5060";
route(FORWARD);
# update $du to set the destination address for proxying
exit;
}
route[CATCH_CANCEL]
{
if (is_method("CANCEL") == true)
{
if (t_check_trans() == true)
{
route(FORWARD);
}
sl_reply("500", "Internal Server Error");
drop;
}
}
route[RR_PARSE]
{
if(loose_route() == true )
{
xlog("L_INFO", "RR-enforced\n");
append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n");
route(FORWARD);
} else
{
xlog("L_INFO", "RR simple\n");
record_route();
}
}
route[REGISTRATION]
{
if(is_method("REGISTER") == true)
{
add_path_received();
append_hf("Supported: path\r\n");
xlog("L_INFO", "GOT REGISTER\n");
}
}
# Per SIP request initial checks
route[REQINIT]
{
if($ua =~ "friendly-scanner|sipcli|VaxSIPUserAgent") {
# silent drop for scanners - uncomment next line if
want to reply
# sl_send_reply("200", "OK");
exit;
}
if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) {
sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops");
exit;
}
if(is_method("OPTIONS") && uri==myself && $rU==$null)
{
sl_send_reply("200","Keepalive");
exit;
}
if(!sanity_check("1511", "7")) {
xlog("Malformed SIP message from $si:$sp\n");
exit;
}
}
route[FORWARD]
{
t_on_failure("FAILROUTE");
t_on_reply("REPLYROUTE");
if(t_relay() <= 0)
{
sl_reply_error();
}
drop;
}
onreply_route[REPLYROUTE]
{
xlog("Reply SIP message from $si:$sp\n");
if (t_check_trans() == false)
{
drop;
}
}
failure_route[FAILROUTE]
{
xlog("Reply Fail SIP message from $si:$sp\n");
}
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
9:15 a.m.
Hi, Thanks for your solution.
I tried to use it from early beginning and this is was a reason why i
created bug report on github.
When i start tcpdump on proxy. I see 404 reply from REGISTRAR to Proxy.
But not see reply from Proxy to UA.
Look like that Kamailio don`t think that 404 reply is a part of transaction.
11:03 a.m.
Hello,
if the device is behind nat router, you have to do the nat traversal
logic, because the Via header will be a private IP address, which cannot
be used for routing by Kamailio.
To troubleshoot further, set debug=3 in kamailio.cfg and test again.
Grab all log messages printed by kamailio in syslog (there should be a
lot with DEBUG:...) and send them here. Also, get the pcap file with sip
traffic for such case. It helps seeing what addresses are in the SIP
headers.
Moreover, remove all those " == false ", as I said in the github issue,
that can be something not giving what you would expect.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 05.04.20 07:15, fuxfwgc4a2i1gr wrote:
Hi, Thanks for your solution.
I tried to use it from early beginning and this is was a reason why i
created bug report on github.
When i start tcpdump on proxy. I see 404 reply from REGISTRAR to
Proxy. But not see reply from Proxy to UA.
Look like that Kamailio don`t think that 404 reply is a part of
transaction.
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
6 Apr
6 Apr
2:32 p.m.
Hello. Thanks for your reply .
I understand about nat . Am i right that even without nat traversal
logic i have to see on proxy itself attempts to connect to private ip
addresses ?
But i not see them.
Ok i changed "== false", to "!= true". I prefer to use long condition
forms to have better config file readability.
But i am not sure that even my "==false" which in block
onreply_route[REPLYROUTE] can influence on something because xlog
operator stay before condition and i have to see a least message that
packet reached onreply_route .
To make capture i using "ngrep -d any -qt -W byline port 7060" it listen
on all interfaces and result exactly same as bug report on github.
I attached debug log from kamailio on system where issue persist. Well i
replaced some private information inside it to avoid voip frauders to
collect information. But privately i can send original ones if needed.
Affected host does not have firewall configured.
It have two ip addresses(two physical interfaces) . One of them assigned
public address, another private (10.34.79.254/20). REGISTRAR in same LAN
segment with proxy private ip address.
On 2020-04-05 09:03, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
if the device is behind nat router, you have to do the nat traversal
logic, because the Via header will be a private IP address, which cannot
be used for routing by Kamailio.
To troubleshoot further, set debug=3 in kamailio.cfg and test again.
Grab all log messages printed by kamailio in syslog (there should be a
lot with DEBUG:...) and send them here. Also, get the pcap file with sip
traffic for such case. It helps seeing what addresses are in the SIP
headers.
Moreover, remove all those " == false ", as I said in the github issue,
that can be something not giving what you would expect.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 05.04.20 07:15, fuxfwgc4a2i1gr wrote:
> Hi, Thanks for your solution.
>
> I tried to use it from early beginning and this is was a reason why i
> created bug report on github.
>
> When i start tcpdump on proxy. I see 404 reply from REGISTRAR to
> Proxy. But not see reply from Proxy to UA.
>
> Look like that Kamailio don`t think that 404 reply is a part of
> transaction.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
4:24 p.m.
Hello,
looking at the log messages, Kamailio is receiving only the REGISTER
request, not the reply to it. If you see it on the network, then some
system filtering (firewall, conntrack, selinux, ...) is dropping it and
is not passed to the application layer.
Can you check if you have any of those tools enabled and having rules to
drop packages?
Also, maybe you can send the pcap with such sip traffic so we can check
if something is wrong at the ip layer (udp checksum, etc...).
Regarding the conditions, doing "!= true" is not better at all. I
understand that you are used to and prefer some specific style, just
that kamailio config interpreter is not like the common scripting
languages interpreters. It doesn't really have support for "bool" as a
type, only evaluation of the code returned by functions is evaluate to
true/false for IF conditions, however that is done in a very particular
way that negative return codes are considered to be a "false" expression
evaluation in IF and positive value is considered to be a "positive"
expression evaluation in IF. Comparing with the token 'false' (which is
value 0) or token 'true' (which is value 1) is not going to give the
results you expect in most of the cases.
Better to stick to if(!function()) or if(!function()), otherwise try to
play with <0 or >0 conditions, but careful on how you build the
expressions and use surrounding parenthesis.
Look also at KEMI interpreters, there you can use Lua, Python, JS, ...
to build the kamailio config routing logic and there you can use a style
specific for those languages, see:
* http://kamailio.org/docs/tutorials/devel/kamailio-kemi-framework/
Cheers,
Daniel
On 06.04.20 12:32, fuxfwgc4a2i1gr wrote:
Hello. Thanks for your reply .
I understand about nat . Am i right that even without nat traversal
logic i have to see on proxy itself attempts to connect to private ip
addresses ?
But i not see them.
Ok i changed "== false", to "!= true". I prefer to use long
condition
forms to have better config file readability.
But i am not sure that even my "==false" which in block
onreply_route[REPLYROUTE] can influence on something because xlog
operator stay before condition and i have to see a least message that
packet reached onreply_route .
To make capture i using "ngrep -d any -qt -W byline port 7060" it
listen on all interfaces and result exactly same as bug report on github.
I attached debug log from kamailio on system where issue persist. Well
i replaced some private information inside it to avoid voip frauders
to collect information. But privately i can send original ones if needed.
Affected host does not have firewall configured.
It have two ip addresses(two physical interfaces) . One of them
assigned public address, another private (10.34.79.254/20). REGISTRAR
in same LAN segment with proxy private ip address.
On 2020-04-05 09:03, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
> Hello,
>
> if the device is behind nat router, you have to do the nat traversal
> logic, because the Via header will be a private IP address, which cannot
> be used for routing by Kamailio.
>
> To troubleshoot further, set debug=3 in kamailio.cfg and test again.
> Grab all log messages printed by kamailio in syslog (there should be a
> lot with DEBUG:...) and send them here. Also, get the pcap file with sip
> traffic for such case. It helps seeing what addresses are in the SIP
> headers.
>
> Moreover, remove all those " == false ", as I said in the github issue,
> that can be something not giving what you would expect.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
> On 05.04.20 07:15, fuxfwgc4a2i1gr wrote:
>> Hi, Thanks for your solution.
>>
>> I tried to use it from early beginning and this is was a reason why i
>> created bug report on github.
>>
>> When i start tcpdump on proxy. I see 404 reply from REGISTRAR to
>> Proxy. But not see reply from Proxy to UA.
>>
>> Look like that Kamailio don`t think that 404 reply is a part of
>> transaction.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>> sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
1677
days inactive
1680
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
David Villasmil -
fuxfwgc4a2i1gr -
Sergiu Pojoga