18 May
2011
18 May
'11
1:10 p.m.
Dear sirs,
using version 3.1.3 (kamailio flavour), I noticed that the Via
inserted by the proxy, relaying an end2end ACK, contains a branch
parameter equal to 0 (with no magic cookie prefixed). No misbehaviour
followed, but I was wonder about the reason for this behaviour and
whether it can be a fault of my config:
route
{
[some checks]
if (!is_method("REGISTER|MESSAGE|PUBLISH")) {
record_route();
} else if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
route(HANDLE_REGISTER);
exit;
}
if (loose_route()){
if (!has_totag()){
if (!is_method("ACK")){
send_reply("403", "Preset Route Set Not Allowed");
}
exit;
}
t_check_trans();
if (is_method("ACK")){
if ($du == $null){
handle_ruri_alias();
}
if (isflagset(T_UAC_NATED) && isflagset(T_UAC_USER)){
add_contact_alias();
}
remove_hf("Proxy-Authorization");
t_relay();
exit;
}
}
[other processing]
}
Here's an example for the forwarded ACK:
U 2011/05/17 15:05:49.392201 proxy_1_ip:5060 -> location_callee_ip:5060
ACK sip:5303838@192.168.130.169;user=phone SIP/2.0.
Record-Route: <sip:proxy_1_ip;lr=on;ftag=a2z0myc9r6>.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP proxy_1_ip;branch=0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP proxy_0_ip;rport=5060;branch=0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
192.168.130.171:2048;received=location_caller_ip;branch=z9hG4bK-pud4cfiz8vsh;rport=4791.
From: "cento tondo" <sip:100@proxy_0_hostname>;tag=a2z0myc9r6.
To: <sip:5375485@proxy_1_hostname;user=phone>;tag=00221b79b1b28969.
Call-ID: 3c352c0b8419-9tbq023tzfkp.
CSeq: 2 ACK.
Max-Forwards: 68.
Contact:
<sip:100@192.168.130.171:2048;alias=location_caller_ip~4791~1;line=gwwqwi25>;reg-id=1.
Content-Length: 0.
.
where proxy_1 does force_rport and record_route() on ACK too, and
proxy_0 does not. Both proxies run the same version, and a similar ACK
script processing.
Best regards,
Francesco Castellano
18 May
18 May
1:12 p.m.
Francesco Castellano writes:
using version 3.1.3 (kamailio flavour), I noticed that
the Via
inserted by the proxy, relaying an end2end ACK, contains a branch
parameter equal to 0 (with no magic cookie prefixed). No misbehaviour
followed, but I was wonder about the reason for this behaviour and
whether it can be a fault of my config:
this has been discussed at length earlier this year. search mailing
list archives.
-- juha
5:20 p.m.
Thanks Juha, I apologise, I was unlucky searching before posting.
Searching for
`"branch parameter" serusers'
`about syn_branch'
produces better results than mine.
Regards,
Francesco Castellano
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Juha Heinanen <jh(a)tutpro.com> wrote:
Francesco Castellano writes:
using version 3.1.3 (kamailio flavour), I noticed
that the Via
inserted by the proxy, relaying an end2end ACK, contains a branch
parameter equal to 0 (with no magic cookie prefixed). No misbehaviour
followed, but I was wonder about the reason for this behaviour and
whether it can be a fault of my config:
this has been discussed at length earlier this year. search mailing
list archives.
-- 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
19 May
19 May
10:56 a.m.
Hi Juha,
On 5/18/11 12:12 PM, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Francesco Castellano writes:
is the conclusion pointing to the suggested solution in the item you
opened on tracker?
http://sip-router.org/tracker/index.php?do=details&task_id=116&proj…
If not, can you update the item with the recommended solution for the
case, it should not be something that complex to add.
Thanks,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com
http://linkedin.com/in/miconda
http://twitter.com/miconda
using version 3.1.3 (kamailio flavour), I noticed
that the Via
inserted by the proxy, relaying an end2end ACK, contains a branch
parameter equal to 0 (with no magic cookie prefixed). No misbehaviour
followed, but I was wonder about the reason for this behaviour and
whether it can be a fault of my config:
this has been discussed at length earlier
this year. search mailing
list archives.
10:58 a.m.
Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
is the conclusion pointing to the suggested solution
in the item you
opened on tracker?
http://sip-router.org/tracker/index.php?do=details&task_id=116&proj…
If not, can you update the item with the recommended solution for the
case, it should not be something that complex to add.
the solution proposed on the tracker is still valid. of course one can
always set syn_branch in the config, but that consumes more resources.
i looked at the code, and it did not appear trivial to me to change 0 to
a valid constant.
-- juha
11:47 a.m.
On 5/19/11 9:58 AM, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
if I understood right, it is about 200 ACK which are forwarded
stateless. If yes, then should be only in forward.c, the condition at
line 545, where the assignment can be changed in a memcpy.
The ack for non-2xx are built differently in tm locally, using forwarded
invite.
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- http://www.asipto.com
http://linkedin.com/in/miconda -- http://twitter.com/miconda
is the conclusion pointing to the suggested
solution in the item you
opened on tracker?
http://sip-router.org/tracker/index.php?do=details&task_id=116&proj…
If not, can you update the item with the recommended solution for the
case, it should not be something that complex to add.
the solution proposed on the
tracker is still valid. of course one can
always set syn_branch in the config, but that consumes more resources.
i looked at the code, and it did not appear trivial to me to change 0 to
a valid constant.
4940
days inactive
4941
days old
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Francesco Castellano -
Juha Heinanen