[Serusers] REGISTER problem with the last stable SER version. - sr-users

8 Jul 2005


      Hello list.
    I detected a strange behavior with my SER. I downloaded the last
stable version from the CVS.  And it seems to work ok.  But for a particular
endpoint the register proccess seems to be corrupted.  This is what i have.
(please check the PORT for the register)
U 200.113.154.25:12196 -> 10.0.0.35:5060
REGISTER sip:sipproxy.mydomain.com SIP/2.0.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 200.113.154.25:12196
SIP/2.0 401 Unauthorized.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 200.113.154.25:12196;branch=z9hG4bK-e4d3ecd4;rport=12196.
U 200.113.154.25:12196 -> 10.0.0.35:5060
REGISTER sip:sipproxy.mydomain.com SIP/2.0.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 200.113.154.25:12196
SIP/2.0 200 OK.
domain: 'location'
aor   : '5555847110'
~~~Contact(0x42326db8)~~~
domain    : 'location'
aor       : '5555847110'
Contact   : 'sip:5555847110@200.113.154.25:121962196'
Expires   : 528
q         : 
Call-ID   : '1016393a-5c1cbaeb@200.113.154.25'
CSeq      : 45
User-Agent: 'Linksys/PAP2-3.1.3(LS)'
received  : ''
State     : CS_NEW
Flags     : 0
next      : (nil)
prev      : (nil)
~~~/Contact~~~~
Then i try to make an invite to the endpoint from the 10.0.0119:
U 10.0.0.119:5060 -> 10.0.0.35:5060
INVITE sip:5555847110@sipproxy.mydomain.com SIP/2.0.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 10.0.0.119:5060
SIP/2.0 100 trying -- your call is important to us.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 200.113.154.25:65236
INVITE sip:5555847110@200.113.154.25:121962196 SIP/2.0.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 200.113.154.25:65236
INVITE sip:5555847110@200.113.154.25:121962196 SIP/2.0.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 200.113.154.25:65236
INVITE sip:5555847110@200.113.154.25:121962196 SIP/2.0.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 200.113.154.25:65236
INVITE sip:5555847110@200.113.154.25:121962196 SIP/2.0.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 200.113.154.25:65236
INVITE sip:5555847110@200.113.154.25:121962196 SIP/2.0.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 200.113.154.25:65236
INVITE sip:5555847110@200.113.154.25:121962196 SIP/2.0.
U 10.0.0.35:5060 -> 200.113.154.25:65236
INVITE sip:5555847110@200.113.154.25:121962196 SIP/2.0.
Is this a bug? 
Or maybe a problem with my configuration.
I hope that someone could help me.
Thanks.
Ricardo Martinez.-