29 Nov
2012
29 Nov
'12
5:09 p.m.
I am having issues with LCR failure route. I have two gateways specified in LCR table, if
I change the address of the gateway with highest priority to a bogus IP, the failure route
never seems to takes place and call is never routed to second gateway.
Also, I have tested successful calls to both gateways by switching the priorities around.
Here is what I receive after the first gateway times out:
U kamailio:5060 -> asterisk:5060
SIP/2.0 408 Request Timeout.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP asterisk:5060;branch=z9hG4bK633b44d8;rport=5060.
From: "user" <sip:user@asterisk>;tag=as67c0037f.
To: <sip:dialednumber@domain>;tag=d7177f97ed67076dddc3163c85ab0656-f2e5.
Call-ID: 248d69ed6495d0a65315458e2ba6c528@asterisk:5060.
CSeq: 102 INVITE.
Server: SIP Proxy.
Content-Length: 0.
Config:
modparam("tm", "fr_timer", 10000)
modparam("tm", "fr_inv_timer", 120000)
modparam("lcr", "db_url", DBURL)
modparam("lcr", "gw_uri_avp", "$avp(i:709)")
modparam("lcr", "ruri_user_avp", "$avp(i:500)")
modparam("lcr", "flags_avp", "$avp(i:712)")
modparam("lcr", "lcr_id_avp", "$avp(s:lcr_id_avp)")
route[LCR] {
if (!load_gws(1)) {
sl_send_reply("503", "Internal Server Error, Unable to load
gateways");
exit;
} else {
if (next_gw()) {
t_on_failure("LCR_FAIL");
route(RELAY);
} else {
sl_send_reply("503", "Service Unavailable, No
available gateways");
exit;
};
};
exit;
}
failure_route[LCR_FAIL] {
if (next_gw()) {
t_on_failure("LCR_FAIL");
route(RELAY);
} else {
t_reply("503", "Service Unavailable, No
gateways");
exit;
};
exit;
}
29 Nov
29 Nov
5:33 p.m.
Sorry all, my message got cut off.
I have the following in database tables:
Lcr_gw -
Lcr_id 1, gw_name gw1, ip_addr x.x.x.x
Lcr_id 1, gw_name gw1, ip_addr x.x.x.x
Rule_target-
Lcr_id 1, rule_id 1, gw_id 1, priority 1, weight 1
Lcr_id-1, rule_id 1, gw_id 2, priority 2, weight 1
Lcr_rule -
Lcr_id 1, prefix null, from_uri null, request_uri null, stopper 0, enabled 1
Any ideas what could cause this?
Any help is much appreciated.
Thanks,
-dan
From: sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org]
On Behalf Of Daniel W. Graham
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 10:09 AM
To: sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
Subject: [SR-Users] LCR Failover
I am having issues with LCR failure route. I have two gateways specified in LCR table, if
I change the address of the gateway with highest priority to a bogus IP, the failure route
never seems to takes place and call is never routed to second gateway.
Also, I have tested successful calls to both gateways by switching the priorities around.
Here is what I receive after the first gateway times out:
U kamailio:5060 -> asterisk:5060
SIP/2.0 408 Request Timeout.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP asterisk:5060;branch=z9hG4bK633b44d8;rport=5060.
From: "user" <sip:user@asterisk>;tag=as67c0037f.
To: <sip:dialednumber@domain>;tag=d7177f97ed67076dddc3163c85ab0656-f2e5.
Call-ID: 248d69ed6495d0a65315458e2ba6c528@asterisk:5060.
CSeq: 102 INVITE.
Server: SIP Proxy.
Content-Length: 0.
Config:
modparam("tm", "fr_timer", 10000)
modparam("tm", "fr_inv_timer", 120000)
modparam("lcr", "db_url", DBURL)
modparam("lcr", "gw_uri_avp", "$avp(i:709)")
modparam("lcr", "ruri_user_avp", "$avp(i:500)")
modparam("lcr", "flags_avp", "$avp(i:712)")
modparam("lcr", "lcr_id_avp", "$avp(s:lcr_id_avp)")
route[LCR] {
if (!load_gws(1)) {
sl_send_reply("503", "Internal Server Error, Unable to load
gateways");
exit;
} else {
if (next_gw()) {
t_on_failure("LCR_FAIL");
route(RELAY);
} else {
sl_send_reply("503", "Service Unavailable, No
available gateways");
exit;
};
};
exit;
}
failure_route[LCR_FAIL] {
if (next_gw()) {
t_on_failure("LCR_FAIL");
route(RELAY);
} else {
t_reply("503", "Service Unavailable, No
gateways");
exit;
};
exit;
}
30 Nov
30 Nov
12:36 a.m.
Daniel W. Graham writes:
I am having issues with LCR failure route. I have two
gateways
specified in LCR table, if I change the address of the gateway with
highest priority to a bogus IP, the failure route never seems to takes
place and call is never routed to second gateway.
perhaps failure route is not executed in that case.
-- juha
4:57 a.m.
Makes sense, would LCR module permit this scenario to work in a different configuration?
Or should I be looking at another module? I could use dispatcher but I'd like the
ability to add additional routes based on prefix in the future.
-----Original Message-----
From: sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org]
On Behalf Of Juha Heinanen
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 5:37 PM
To: SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List
Subject: [SR-Users] LCR Failover
Daniel W. Graham writes:
I am having issues with LCR failure route. I have two
gateways
specified in LCR table, if I change the address of the gateway with
highest priority to a bogus IP, the failure route never seems to takes
place and call is never routed to second gateway.
perhaps failure route is not executed in that case.
-- juha
_______________________________________________
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
8:34 a.m.
Daniel W. Graham writes:
Makes sense, would LCR module permit this scenario to
work in a
different configuration? Or should I be looking at another module? I
could use dispatcher but I'd like the ability to add additional routes
based on prefix in the future.
if t_relay fails and failure route is not executed, you should call
next_gw in route block.
-- juha
7:42 p.m.
Gave that a try still without success.
-----Original Message-----
From: sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org]
On Behalf Of Juha Heinanen
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 1:34 AM
To: SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] LCR Failover
Daniel W. Graham writes:
Makes sense, would LCR module permit this scenario to
work in a
different configuration? Or should I be looking at another module? I
could use dispatcher but I'd like the ability to add additional routes
based on prefix in the future.
if t_relay fails and failure route is not executed, you should call next_gw in route
block.
-- juha
_______________________________________________
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
10:49 p.m.
Kamailio sends the following when the first gateway times out. Failure route is never
executed and next_gw specified in route block still results in the following.
Asterisk placed call to kamailio:
U kamailio:5060 -> asterisk:5060
SIP/2.0 408 Request Timeout.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP asterisk:5060;branch=z9hG4bK670647ee;rport=5060.
From: "user" <sip:asterisk>;tag=as12708af4.
To: <sip:dialednumber@domain>;tag=d7177f97ed67076dddc3163c85ab0656-a8a1.
Call-ID: 35e9d8016fec2d9011d470a53224e923@asterisk:5060.
CSeq: 102 INVITE.
Server: SIP Proxy.
Content-Length: 0.
-----Original Message-----
From: sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org]
On Behalf Of Daniel W. Graham
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 12:42 PM
To: SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] LCR Failover
Gave that a try still without success.
-----Original Message-----
From: sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org]
On Behalf Of Juha Heinanen
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 1:34 AM
To: SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] LCR Failover
Daniel W. Graham writes:
Makes sense, would LCR module permit this scenario to
work in a
different configuration? Or should I be looking at another module? I
could use dispatcher but I'd like the ability to add additional routes
based on prefix in the future.
if t_relay fails and failure route is not executed, you should call next_gw in route
block.
-- juha
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
3 Dec
3 Dec
10:05 p.m.
I was able to figure out why my logic didn't work. I was calling the default
route(RELAY) in LCR route, since route(RELAY) has t_on_failure already specified, setting
t_on_failure in LCR route did nothing.
I am now calling t_relay directly from LCR route and failure route is now working. I just
need to tweak timers and make sure I do not need to call any other functions such as
NATMANAGE that are specified in default route(RELAY).
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel W. Graham
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 3:50 PM
To: SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List
Subject: RE: [SR-Users] LCR Failover
Kamailio sends the following when the first gateway times out. Failure route is never
executed and next_gw specified in route block still results in the following.
Asterisk placed call to kamailio:
U kamailio:5060 -> asterisk:5060
SIP/2.0 408 Request Timeout.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP asterisk:5060;branch=z9hG4bK670647ee;rport=5060.
From: "user" <sip:asterisk>;tag=as12708af4.
To: <sip:dialednumber@domain>;tag=d7177f97ed67076dddc3163c85ab0656-a8a1.
Call-ID: 35e9d8016fec2d9011d470a53224e923@asterisk:5060.
CSeq: 102 INVITE.
Server: SIP Proxy.
Content-Length: 0.
-----Original Message-----
From: sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org]
On Behalf Of Daniel W. Graham
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 12:42 PM
To: SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] LCR Failover
Gave that a try still without success.
-----Original Message-----
From: sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org]
On Behalf Of Juha Heinanen
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 1:34 AM
To: SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] LCR Failover
Daniel W. Graham writes:
Makes sense, would LCR module permit this scenario to
work in a
different configuration? Or should I be looking at another module? I
could use dispatcher but I'd like the ability to add additional routes
based on prefix in the future.
if t_relay fails and failure route is not executed, you should call next_gw in route
block.
-- juha
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
4375
days inactive
4379
days old
7 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Daniel W. Graham -
Juha Heinanen