Sorry, I didn't understand that. Is it good or bad that it is asymmetrical? And if not, what should it be? As far as I understand from my config, it first checks if NAT is set, and if so, it goes to force_rtp_proxy if it's INVITE and unforce_rtp_proxy if it's a BYE. Is that not correct?
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Alex Balashov abalashov@evaristesys.com wrote:
This suggests asymmetrical invocation of rtpproxy, for example in 200 OK but not corresponding INVITE.
-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 1170 Peachtree Street 12th Floor, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30309 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/
On Oct 13, 2010, at 1:33 PM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to get the RTP proxy to work with Kamailio (1.5), but right now I am getting this error here:
Oct 13 16:54:44 vn1031 /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[13622]: ERROR:nathelper:force_rtp_proxy: incorrect port 0 in reply from rtp proxy
There is probably something wrong in my cfg - for the use of force_rtp_proxy that part of my config is here below. See anything odd that could lead to the error above?
route { ...... route(4); ...... }
route[4]{ force_rport(); if (nat_uac_test("19")) { if (method=="REGISTER") { fix_nated_register(); } else { fix_nated_contact(); } setflag(5); } return; }
route[5] { if (is_method("BYE")) { unforce_rtp_proxy(); } else if (is_method("INVITE")){ force_rtp_proxy(); } if (!has_totag()) add_rr_param(";nat=yes"); return; }
onreply_route[1] { xdbg("incoming reply\n");
if (!(status =~ "183" || status =~ "200")) exit; #fix_nated_contact(); force_rtp_proxy(); }
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
I've been looking around for documentation to understand rtp proxy with Kamailio better, but with no luck (or I might be quite thick-headed!).
Anyone know of example configurations with rtp proxy and Kamailio, so I can start seeing what is wrong with my config (below)?
Thanks!
//Anders
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry, I didn't understand that. Is it good or bad that it is asymmetrical? And if not, what should it be? As far as I understand from my config, it first checks if NAT is set, and if so, it goes to force_rtp_proxy if it's INVITE and unforce_rtp_proxy if it's a BYE. Is that not correct?
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Alex Balashov abalashov@evaristesys.com wrote:
This suggests asymmetrical invocation of rtpproxy, for example in 200 OK but not corresponding INVITE.
-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 1170 Peachtree Street 12th Floor, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30309 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/
On Oct 13, 2010, at 1:33 PM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to get the RTP proxy to work with Kamailio (1.5), but right now I am getting this error here:
Oct 13 16:54:44 vn1031 /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[13622]: ERROR:nathelper:force_rtp_proxy: incorrect port 0 in reply from rtp proxy
There is probably something wrong in my cfg - for the use of force_rtp_proxy that part of my config is here below. See anything odd that could lead to the error above?
route { ...... route(4); ...... }
route[4]{ force_rport(); if (nat_uac_test("19")) { if (method=="REGISTER") { fix_nated_register(); } else { fix_nated_contact(); } setflag(5); } return; }
route[5] { if (is_method("BYE")) { unforce_rtp_proxy(); } else if (is_method("INVITE")){ force_rtp_proxy(); } if (!has_totag()) add_rr_param(";nat=yes"); return; }
onreply_route[1] { xdbg("incoming reply\n");
if (!(status =~ "183" || status =~ "200")) exit; #fix_nated_contact(); force_rtp_proxy(); }
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Check out the examples provided in the code: http://git.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=sip-router;a=blob_plain;f=mod... http://git.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=sip-router;a=blob_plain;f=mod...
Regards, Ovidiu Sas
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
I've been looking around for documentation to understand rtp proxy with Kamailio better, but with no luck (or I might be quite thick-headed!).
Anyone know of example configurations with rtp proxy and Kamailio, so I can start seeing what is wrong with my config (below)?
Thanks!
//Anders
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry, I didn't understand that. Is it good or bad that it is asymmetrical? And if not, what should it be? As far as I understand from my config, it first checks if NAT is set, and if so, it goes to force_rtp_proxy if it's INVITE and unforce_rtp_proxy if it's a BYE. Is that not correct?
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Alex Balashov abalashov@evaristesys.com wrote:
This suggests asymmetrical invocation of rtpproxy, for example in 200 OK but not corresponding INVITE.
-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 1170 Peachtree Street 12th Floor, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30309 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/
On Oct 13, 2010, at 1:33 PM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to get the RTP proxy to work with Kamailio (1.5), but right now I am getting this error here:
Oct 13 16:54:44 vn1031 /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[13622]: ERROR:nathelper:force_rtp_proxy: incorrect port 0 in reply from rtp proxy
There is probably something wrong in my cfg - for the use of force_rtp_proxy that part of my config is here below. See anything odd that could lead to the error above?
route { ...... route(4); ...... }
route[4]{ force_rport(); if (nat_uac_test("19")) { if (method=="REGISTER") { fix_nated_register(); } else { fix_nated_contact(); } setflag(5); } return; }
route[5] { if (is_method("BYE")) { unforce_rtp_proxy(); } else if (is_method("INVITE")){ force_rtp_proxy(); } if (!has_totag()) add_rr_param(";nat=yes"); return; }
onreply_route[1] { xdbg("incoming reply\n");
if (!(status =~ "183" || status =~ "200")) exit; #fix_nated_contact(); force_rtp_proxy(); }
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@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@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Thanks for the references to examples. I've been through them, gotten rid of force_rtp_proxy() since it's considered depreciated - but still get the same error:
/usr/local/sbin/kamailio[31035]: ERROR:nathelper:force_rtp_proxy: incorrect port 0 in reply from rtp proxy
I do this in my main route
1. A force_rport() for everything 2. Check if it is likely NAT all with nat_uac_test("19"), and if true... 3. If it is anything but a REGISTER, fix_nated_contact() 4. If it is an INVITE, do rtpproxy_offer() - and an unforce_rtp_proxy() if it is BYE 5. If there is no to tag, do add_rr_param(";nat=yet")
In the onreply_route[1] this is done:
A. xdbg("incoming reply\n") ...and I have no clue what this is for(!) B. If it 183 or 200, rtpproxy_answer() is called
...and that is it, but still the "incorrect port 0 in reply from rtp proxy".
Any ideas?
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Ovidiu Sas osas@voipembedded.com wrote:
Check out the examples provided in the code: http://git.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=sip-router;a=blob_plain;f=mod... http://git.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=sip-router;a=blob_plain;f=mod...
Regards, Ovidiu Sas
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
I've been looking around for documentation to understand rtp proxy with Kamailio better, but with no luck (or I might be quite thick-headed!).
Anyone know of example configurations with rtp proxy and Kamailio, so I can start seeing what is wrong with my config (below)?
Thanks!
//Anders
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry, I didn't understand that. Is it good or bad that it is asymmetrical? And if not, what should it be? As far as I understand from my config, it first checks if NAT is set, and if so, it goes to force_rtp_proxy if it's INVITE and unforce_rtp_proxy if it's a BYE. Is that not correct?
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Alex Balashov abalashov@evaristesys.com wrote:
This suggests asymmetrical invocation of rtpproxy, for example in 200 OK but not corresponding INVITE.
-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 1170 Peachtree Street 12th Floor, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30309 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/
On Oct 13, 2010, at 1:33 PM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to get the RTP proxy to work with Kamailio (1.5), but right now I am getting this error here:
Oct 13 16:54:44 vn1031 /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[13622]: ERROR:nathelper:force_rtp_proxy: incorrect port 0 in reply from rtp proxy
There is probably something wrong in my cfg - for the use of force_rtp_proxy that part of my config is here below. See anything odd that could lead to the error above?
route { ...... route(4); ...... }
route[4]{ force_rport(); if (nat_uac_test("19")) { if (method=="REGISTER") { fix_nated_register(); } else { fix_nated_contact(); } setflag(5); } return; }
route[5] { if (is_method("BYE")) { unforce_rtp_proxy(); } else if (is_method("INVITE")){ force_rtp_proxy(); } if (!has_totag()) add_rr_param(";nat=yes"); return; }
onreply_route[1] { xdbg("incoming reply\n");
if (!(status =~ "183" || status =~ "200")) exit; #fix_nated_contact(); force_rtp_proxy(); }
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@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@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
The example that is in the link is using rtpproxy_offer/rtpproxy_answer (don't know which files you were browsing). The script is provided as an example. Once you understand how it works, you can build on top of it.
You need to invoke rtpproxy_offer for the first SIP request or reply that is carrying SDP and rtpproxy_answer for the subsequent reply or ACK request that is carrying SDP. Take a look at the README file: http://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/3.1.x/modules_k/rtpproxy.html#id2759708
Regards, Ovidiu Sas
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the references to examples. I've been through them, gotten rid of force_rtp_proxy() since it's considered depreciated - but still get the same error:
/usr/local/sbin/kamailio[31035]: ERROR:nathelper:force_rtp_proxy: incorrect port 0 in reply from rtp proxy
I do this in my main route
- A force_rport() for everything
- Check if it is likely NAT all with nat_uac_test("19"), and if true...
- If it is anything but a REGISTER, fix_nated_contact()
- If it is an INVITE, do rtpproxy_offer() - and an
unforce_rtp_proxy() if it is BYE 5. If there is no to tag, do add_rr_param(";nat=yet")
In the onreply_route[1] this is done:
A. xdbg("incoming reply\n") ...and I have no clue what this is for(!) B. If it 183 or 200, rtpproxy_answer() is called
...and that is it, but still the "incorrect port 0 in reply from rtp proxy".
Any ideas?
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Ovidiu Sas osas@voipembedded.com wrote:
Check out the examples provided in the code: http://git.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=sip-router;a=blob_plain;f=mod... http://git.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=sip-router;a=blob_plain;f=mod...
Regards, Ovidiu Sas
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
I've been looking around for documentation to understand rtp proxy with Kamailio better, but with no luck (or I might be quite thick-headed!).
Anyone know of example configurations with rtp proxy and Kamailio, so I can start seeing what is wrong with my config (below)?
Thanks!
//Anders
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry, I didn't understand that. Is it good or bad that it is asymmetrical? And if not, what should it be? As far as I understand from my config, it first checks if NAT is set, and if so, it goes to force_rtp_proxy if it's INVITE and unforce_rtp_proxy if it's a BYE. Is that not correct?
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Alex Balashov abalashov@evaristesys.com wrote:
This suggests asymmetrical invocation of rtpproxy, for example in 200 OK but not corresponding INVITE.
-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 1170 Peachtree Street 12th Floor, Suite 1200 Atlanta, GA 30309 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/
On Oct 13, 2010, at 1:33 PM, Anders vaerge@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi, > > I'm trying to get the RTP proxy to work with Kamailio (1.5), but right > now I am getting this error here: > > Oct 13 16:54:44 vn1031 /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[13622]: > ERROR:nathelper:force_rtp_proxy: incorrect port 0 in reply from rtp > proxy > > There is probably something wrong in my cfg - for the use of > force_rtp_proxy that part of my config is here below. See anything odd > that could lead to the error above? > > route { > ...... > route(4); > ...... > } > > route[4]{ > force_rport(); > if (nat_uac_test("19")) { > if (method=="REGISTER") { > fix_nated_register(); > } else { > fix_nated_contact(); > } > setflag(5); > } > return; > } > > route[5] { > if (is_method("BYE")) { > unforce_rtp_proxy(); > } else if (is_method("INVITE")){ > force_rtp_proxy(); > } > if (!has_totag()) add_rr_param(";nat=yes"); > return; > } > > onreply_route[1] { > xdbg("incoming reply\n"); > > if (!(status =~ "183" || status =~ "200")) > exit; > #fix_nated_contact(); > force_rtp_proxy(); > } > > _______________________________________________ > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list > sr-users@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@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-
Anders -
Ovidiu Sas