i am helping krunal debug this issue.
The log from the router seems fine, no dealy in any other kind of messages. As the packets leave the router after 15ms they reach the proxy.
Logging the router we get that the new invite is sent with delay,
Is it possible that the router has some problem preparing the digest parameters?
The very strange think is that the same router with the same config changing only the default proxy and letting it to point to a old SER config that does the invita auth by the same way, we don't get any delay.
regards
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Krunal Patel" krunal.lists@gmail.com Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
Hello,
On 12/19/08 15:40, Krunal Patel wrote:
Hi,
I am using openser 1.2.3.
From a router calls comes to openser. Router is PATTON 4960. I am using domain name to send calls to openser.
First invite comes to openser & openser sends 407 to the router & then getting ACK from the router to openser.
Now the invite with authentication comes after almost 10 to 11 sec Since ACK comes to openser.
looks being related to the client. Can you check the logs of the router? Might be something with the DNS, responding slow.
Also, if you can plug the router in a hub you can check when the messages are sent and when they reach the sip proxy, being able to see where is the issue.
Cheers, Daniel
Here is the trace: # U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374228 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ... # U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374544 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab;rport=5060. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ...
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.407646 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 ACK sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 0. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. ....
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.667448 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. ...
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.692576 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060;transport=udp SIP/2.0. Record-Route: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;ftag=72a0c76ae3d477c;lr=on. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY;branch=z9hG4bK32dd.6cc062c5.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. Max-Forwards: 69. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ...
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.731432 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 SIP/2.0 100 Trying. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ....
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849714 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0. ...
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849961 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0.
Can anybody help me to trobleshoot the issue?
Thanks in Advance!!
-- Krunal patel
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On 12/20/08 12:13, Rosario Pingaro wrote:
i am helping krunal debug this issue.
The log from the router seems fine, no dealy in any other kind of messages. As the packets leave the router after 15ms they reach the proxy.
Logging the router we get that the new invite is sent with delay,
Is it possible that the router has some problem preparing the digest parameters?
this you have to ask the vendor of that router.
The very strange think is that the same router with the same config changing only the default proxy and letting it to point to a old SER config that does the invita auth by the same way, we don't get any delay.
Is this for each challenged INVITE?
Cheers, Daniel
regards
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Krunal Patel" krunal.lists@gmail.com Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
Hello,
On 12/19/08 15:40, Krunal Patel wrote:
Hi,
I am using openser 1.2.3.
From a router calls comes to openser. Router is PATTON 4960. I am using domain name to send calls to openser.
First invite comes to openser & openser sends 407 to the router & then getting ACK from the router to openser.
Now the invite with authentication comes after almost 10 to 11 sec Since ACK comes to openser.
looks being related to the client. Can you check the logs of the router? Might be something with the DNS, responding slow.
Also, if you can plug the router in a hub you can check when the messages are sent and when they reach the sip proxy, being able to see where is the issue.
Cheers, Daniel
Here is the trace: # U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374228 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ... # U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374544 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab;rport=5060. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ...
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.407646 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 ACK sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 0. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. ....
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.667448 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. ...
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.692576 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060;transport=udp SIP/2.0. Record-Route: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;ftag=72a0c76ae3d477c;lr=on. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY;branch=z9hG4bK32dd.6cc062c5.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. Max-Forwards: 69. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ...
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.731432 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 SIP/2.0 100 Trying. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ....
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849714 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0. ...
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849961 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0.
Can anybody help me to trobleshoot the issue?
Thanks in Advance!!
-- Krunal patel
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Is this for each challenged INVITE?
yes it is
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Rosario Pingaro" rpingar@nesec.it Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 11:40 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Fw: Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
On 12/20/08 12:13, Rosario Pingaro wrote:
i am helping krunal debug this issue.
The log from the router seems fine, no dealy in any other kind of messages. As the packets leave the router after 15ms they reach the proxy.
Logging the router we get that the new invite is sent with delay,
Is it possible that the router has some problem preparing the digest parameters?
this you have to ask the vendor of that router.
The very strange think is that the same router with the same config changing only the default proxy and letting it to point to a old SER config that does the invita auth by the same way, we don't get any delay.
Is this for each challenged INVITE?
Cheers, Daniel
regards
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Krunal Patel" krunal.lists@gmail.com Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
Hello,
On 12/19/08 15:40, Krunal Patel wrote:
Hi,
I am using openser 1.2.3.
From a router calls comes to openser. Router is PATTON 4960. I am using domain name to send calls to openser.
First invite comes to openser & openser sends 407 to the router & then getting ACK from the router to openser.
Now the invite with authentication comes after almost 10 to 11 sec Since ACK comes to openser.
looks being related to the client. Can you check the logs of the router? Might be something with the DNS, responding slow.
Also, if you can plug the router in a hub you can check when the messages are sent and when they reach the sip proxy, being able to see where is the issue.
Cheers, Daniel
Here is the trace: # U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374228 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ... # U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374544 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab;rport=5060. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ...
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.407646 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 ACK sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 0. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. ....
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.667448 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. ...
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.692576 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060;transport=udp SIP/2.0. Record-Route: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;ftag=72a0c76ae3d477c;lr=on. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY;branch=z9hG4bK32dd.6cc062c5.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. Max-Forwards: 69. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ...
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.731432 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 SIP/2.0 100 Trying. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ....
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849714 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0. ...
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849961 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0.
Can anybody help me to trobleshoot the issue?
Thanks in Advance!!
-- Krunal patel
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
On 12/20/08 13:37, Rosario Pingaro wrote:
Is this for each challenged INVITE?
yes it is
you should compare the 407 for both cases (delayed, not delayed), maybe gives you a hint. It is not much that can be done on the proxy side, you need to reduce the sources for the delay somehow, by using IP addresses, etc ... and see if there is a change...
Cheers, Daniel
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Rosario Pingaro" rpingar@nesec.it Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 11:40 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Fw: Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
On 12/20/08 12:13, Rosario Pingaro wrote:
i am helping krunal debug this issue.
The log from the router seems fine, no dealy in any other kind of messages. As the packets leave the router after 15ms they reach the proxy.
Logging the router we get that the new invite is sent with delay,
Is it possible that the router has some problem preparing the digest parameters?
this you have to ask the vendor of that router.
The very strange think is that the same router with the same config changing only the default proxy and letting it to point to a old SER config that does the invita auth by the same way, we don't get any delay.
Is this for each challenged INVITE?
Cheers, Daniel
regards
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Krunal Patel" krunal.lists@gmail.com Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
Hello,
On 12/19/08 15:40, Krunal Patel wrote:
Hi,
I am using openser 1.2.3.
From a router calls comes to openser. Router is PATTON 4960. I am using domain name to send calls to openser.
First invite comes to openser & openser sends 407 to the router & then getting ACK from the router to openser.
Now the invite with authentication comes after almost 10 to 11 sec Since ACK comes to openser.
looks being related to the client. Can you check the logs of the router? Might be something with the DNS, responding slow.
Also, if you can plug the router in a hub you can check when the messages are sent and when they reach the sip proxy, being able to see where is the issue.
Cheers, Daniel
Here is the trace: # U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374228 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ... # U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374544 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab;rport=5060. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ...
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.407646 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 ACK sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 0. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. ....
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.667448 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. Max-Forwards: 70. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. ...
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.692576 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060;transport=udp SIP/2.0. Record-Route: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;ftag=72a0c76ae3d477c;lr=on. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY;branch=z9hG4bK32dd.6cc062c5.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. Max-Forwards: 69. Content-Length: 341. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ...
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.731432 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 SIP/2.0 100 Trying. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. ....
U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849714 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0. ...
# U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849961 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0.
Can anybody help me to trobleshoot the issue?
Thanks in Advance!!
-- Krunal patel
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Hi Daniel,
this is the 407 from SER that is NOT causing the delay on our router:
16:17:08 SIP_TR> [GW] < Stack: SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bKcc99d3262 To: sip:0888888888@MYDOMAIN;tag=bea15bd2a0fcc7d5c9f2fe9e6d4e6fc2.9735 From: sip:0999999999@MYDOMAIN;tag=fae776b49407ab9 Call-ID: c41297c7be3e587f0c7b0dbee2142ee9@voip.convergenze.it CSeq: 1657635173 INVITE Proxy-Authenticate: Digest realm="MYDOMAIN", nonce="494d1bb0005ea3cb4d04bbfef95f2dae3f8ca112" Server: Sip EXpress router (0.9.4 (i386/linux)) Content-Length: 0 Warning: 392 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=7626 req_src_ip=XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX req_src_port=5060 in_uri=sip:08888888888@MYDOMAIN out_uri=sip:08888888888@MYDOMAIN via_cnt==1"
This is the 407 that is causing us a lot of delay (8-11 secs) to generate the second invite:
13:51:15 SIP_TR> [GW] < Stack: SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK5b9d02014;rport=5060 To: sip:0888888888@MYDOMAIN;tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.fd3c From: sip:0999999999@MYDOMAIN;tag=d113d877f95ea42 Call-ID: 7df619c44a4ec9adf3bc2af643e4e272@voip.convergenze.it CSeq: 1186167205 INVITE Proxy-Authenticate: Digest realm="MYDOMAIN", nonce="494ba7ff70334184c6e9e055eec8bdb83894f46e" Server: OpenSER (1.2.3-notls (i386/linux)) Content-Length: 0
Any idea about them?
regards
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Rosario Pingaro" rpingar@nesec.it Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Fw: Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
On 12/20/08 13:37, Rosario Pingaro wrote:
Is this for each challenged INVITE?
yes it is
you should compare the 407 for both cases (delayed, not delayed), maybe gives you a hint. It is not much that can be done on the proxy side, you need to reduce the sources for the delay somehow, by using IP addresses, etc ... and see if there is a change...
Cheers, Daniel
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Rosario Pingaro" rpingar@nesec.it Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 11:40 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Fw: Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
On 12/20/08 12:13, Rosario Pingaro wrote:
i am helping krunal debug this issue.
The log from the router seems fine, no dealy in any other kind of messages. As the packets leave the router after 15ms they reach the proxy.
Logging the router we get that the new invite is sent with delay,
Is it possible that the router has some problem preparing the digest parameters?
this you have to ask the vendor of that router.
The very strange think is that the same router with the same config changing only the default proxy and letting it to point to a old SER config that does the invita auth by the same way, we don't get any delay.
Is this for each challenged INVITE?
Cheers, Daniel
regards
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Krunal Patel" krunal.lists@gmail.com Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
Hello,
On 12/19/08 15:40, Krunal Patel wrote:
> Hi, > > I am using openser 1.2.3. > > From a router calls comes to openser. > Router is PATTON 4960. > I am using domain name to send calls to openser. > > First invite comes to openser & openser sends 407 to the router & > then > getting ACK from the router to openser. > > Now the invite with authentication comes after almost 10 to 11 sec > Since ACK comes to openser. > > looks being related to the client. Can you check the logs of the router? Might be something with the DNS, responding slow.
Also, if you can plug the router in a hub you can check when the messages are sent and when they reach the sip proxy, being able to see where is the issue.
Cheers, Daniel
> Here is the trace: > # > U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374228 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> > YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 > INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. > Max-Forwards: 70. > Content-Length: 341. > To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. > From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. > ... > # > U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374544 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> > XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 > SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required. > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP > XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab;rport=5060. > To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL > PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. > From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. > ... > > # > U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.407646 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> > YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 > ACK sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. > Max-Forwards: 70. > Content-Length: 0. > To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL > PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. > Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. > .... > > > # > U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.667448 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> > YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 > INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. > Max-Forwards: 70. > Content-Length: 341. > To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. > From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. > Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. > ... > > U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.692576 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> > ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 > INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060;transport=udp SIP/2.0. > Record-Route: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;ftag=72a0c76ae3d477c;lr=on>. > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY;branch=z9hG4bK32dd.6cc062c5.0. > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP > XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. > Max-Forwards: 69. > Content-Length: 341. > To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. > From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. > ... > > U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.731432 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> > YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 > SIP/2.0 100 Trying. > Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. > CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. > From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. > .... > > > U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849714 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> > YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 > SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. > Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. > CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. > From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. > To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0. > ... > > # > U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849961 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> > XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 > SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. > Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. > CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. > From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. > To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0. > > > Can anybody help me to trobleshoot the issue? > > Thanks in Advance!! > > -- > Krunal patel > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.kamailio.org > http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > >
>
Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Hello,
On 12/20/08 19:01, Rosario Pingaro wrote:
Hi Daniel,
this is the 407 from SER that is NOT causing the delay on our router:
16:17:08 SIP_TR> [GW] < Stack: SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bKcc99d3262 To: sip:0888888888@MYDOMAIN;tag=bea15bd2a0fcc7d5c9f2fe9e6d4e6fc2.9735 From: sip:0999999999@MYDOMAIN;tag=fae776b49407ab9 Call-ID: c41297c7be3e587f0c7b0dbee2142ee9@voip.convergenze.it CSeq: 1657635173 INVITE Proxy-Authenticate: Digest realm="MYDOMAIN", nonce="494d1bb0005ea3cb4d04bbfef95f2dae3f8ca112" Server: Sip EXpress router (0.9.4 (i386/linux)) Content-Length: 0 Warning: 392 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=7626 req_src_ip=XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX req_src_port=5060 in_uri=sip:08888888888@MYDOMAIN out_uri=sip:08888888888@MYDOMAIN via_cnt==1"
This is the 407 that is causing us a lot of delay (8-11 secs) to generate the second invite:
13:51:15 SIP_TR> [GW] < Stack: SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK5b9d02014;rport=5060 To: sip:0888888888@MYDOMAIN;tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.fd3c From: sip:0999999999@MYDOMAIN;tag=d113d877f95ea42 Call-ID: 7df619c44a4ec9adf3bc2af643e4e272@voip.convergenze.it CSeq: 1186167205 INVITE Proxy-Authenticate: Digest realm="MYDOMAIN", nonce="494ba7ff70334184c6e9e055eec8bdb83894f46e" Server: OpenSER (1.2.3-notls (i386/linux)) Content-Length: 0
Any idea about them?
they look very similar. What I can see is the presence of rport parameter in the Via, but it is not a reason for such delay
Cheers, Daniel
regards
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Rosario Pingaro" rpingar@nesec.it Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Fw: Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
On 12/20/08 13:37, Rosario Pingaro wrote:
Is this for each challenged INVITE?
yes it is
you should compare the 407 for both cases (delayed, not delayed), maybe gives you a hint. It is not much that can be done on the proxy side, you need to reduce the sources for the delay somehow, by using IP addresses, etc ... and see if there is a change...
Cheers, Daniel
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Rosario Pingaro" rpingar@nesec.it Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 11:40 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Fw: Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
On 12/20/08 12:13, Rosario Pingaro wrote:
i am helping krunal debug this issue.
The log from the router seems fine, no dealy in any other kind of messages. As the packets leave the router after 15ms they reach the proxy.
Logging the router we get that the new invite is sent with delay,
Is it possible that the router has some problem preparing the digest parameters?
this you have to ask the vendor of that router.
The very strange think is that the same router with the same config changing only the default proxy and letting it to point to a old SER config that does the invita auth by the same way, we don't get any delay.
Is this for each challenged INVITE?
Cheers, Daniel
regards
Rosario Pingaro
D. Lgs 196/2003 Il presente messaggio contiene informazioni confidenziali, indirizzate esclusivamente alle persone sopra indicate. Se il ricevente non è tra dette persone, non dovrà intraprendere alcuna azione, tipo copia, stampa o trasmettere il suo contenuto a terzi ed i relativi allegati, ma solo informare il mittente dell'errore e cancellare il messaggio. Il mittente dovrà, altresì, accertarsi che gli allegati non contengano virus prima di aprirli.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" miconda@gmail.com To: "Krunal Patel" krunal.lists@gmail.com Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Help!! Delay in Invite with Authentication
> Hello, > > On 12/19/08 15:40, Krunal Patel wrote: > > >> Hi, >> >> I am using openser 1.2.3. >> >> From a router calls comes to openser. >> Router is PATTON 4960. >> I am using domain name to send calls to openser. >> >> First invite comes to openser & openser sends 407 to the router >> & then >> getting ACK from the router to openser. >> >> Now the invite with authentication comes after almost 10 to 11 sec >> Since ACK comes to openser. >> >> > looks being related to the client. Can you check the logs of the > router? > Might be something with the DNS, responding slow. > > Also, if you can plug the router in a hub you can check when the > messages are sent and when they reach the sip proxy, being able > to see > where is the issue. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > > >> Here is the trace: >> # >> U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374228 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> >> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 >> INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. >> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. >> Max-Forwards: 70. >> Content-Length: 341. >> To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. >> From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. >> ... >> # >> U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.374544 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> >> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 >> SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required. >> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP >> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab;rport=5060. >> To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL >> PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. >> From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. >> ... >> >> # >> U 2008/12/19 12:24:24.407646 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> >> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 >> ACK sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. >> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK227032cab. >> Max-Forwards: 70. >> Content-Length: 0. >> To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL >> PROTECTED];tag=b802e73ab92fec121a4f880263d541a3.7575. >> Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. >> .... >> >> >> # >> U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.667448 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 -> >> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 >> INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0. >> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. >> Max-Forwards: 70. >> Content-Length: 341. >> To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. >> From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. >> Route: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060;lr>. >> ... >> >> U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.692576 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> >> ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 >> INVITE sip:[TO_NUMBER]@ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060;transport=udp SIP/2.0. >> Record-Route: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL > PROTECTED]:5060;ftag=72a0c76ae3d477c;lr=on>. >> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY;branch=z9hG4bK32dd.6cc062c5.0. >> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP >> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK3362d177f. >> Max-Forwards: 69. >> Content-Length: 341. >> To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. >> From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. >> ... >> >> U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.731432 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> >> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 >> SIP/2.0 100 Trying. >> Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. >> CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. >> From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. >> .... >> >> >> U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849714 ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ.ZZZ:5060 -> >> YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 >> SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. >> Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. >> CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. >> From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. >> To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0. >> ... >> >> # >> U 2008/12/19 12:24:35.849961 YYY.YYY.YYY.YYY:5060 -> >> XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:5060 >> SIP/2.0 183 Session Progress. >> Call-ID: 1c00f084ccd0232ad5ab638dc6a7ccfd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]. >> CSeq: 1965370819 INVITE. >> From: sip:[FROM_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=72a0c76ae3d477c. >> To: sip:[TO_NUMBER]@[EMAIL PROTECTED];tag=86f125f633683d0. >> >> >> Can anybody help me to trobleshoot the issue? >> >> Thanks in Advance!! >> >> -- >> Krunal patel >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> Users@lists.kamailio.org >> http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >> >> >> > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla > http://www.asipto.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.kamailio.org > http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > > >
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com
-
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Rosario Pingaro