10 Nov
2006
10 Nov
'06
11:45 a.m.
I have a scenario where user Alice registered with OpenSER with UDP
port 5070. Then, I have user Bob sending an invite to Alice via the
OpenSER using TCP. Hence, OpenSER is bridging my TCP SIP requests
to UDP (and vice versa for the responses).
Here is the sequence:
Alice ----- TCP Invite -----> OpenSER ---------- UDP Invite ------
Alice
Alice responds back with 180 ringing, then 200 Ok.
Upon getting the 200 OK, Bob sends an ACK (to complete the INVITE),
followed by an Immediate BYE.
THE TROUBLE IS...... the ACK and the BYE that Bob sends are dropped
by OpenSER, and never forwarded onto Alice!!!! I see nothing wrong
with the messages. WHat is happening?
sip:~ russdaigle$ sudo tcpdump -i en0 -A -q -s 2000 port 5060
Password:
tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol
decode
listening on en0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 2000 bytes
The following shows an sip-invite-bye from mutator using TCP to mjsip
(via
OPENSER). Everything after the ACK is dropped and not sent on.
Then, is a similar but UDP exchange. In that case, we get a 404 not
found
in response to the BYE!!!
01:17:59.553909 IP 10.10.2.6.50135 > 10.10.1.234.sip: tcp 588
INVITE sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Contact: <sip:bob@10.10.2.6>;transport=TCP
Max-Forwards: 70
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 195
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 10.10.2.6
t=0 0
m=audio 5000 RTP/AVP 0 4 97
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
a=rtpmap:97 telephone-event/8000
01:17:59.554929 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.50135: tcp 536
SIP/2.0 100 trying -- your call is important to us
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Server: OpenSer (1.1.0-notls (i386/darwin))
Content-Length: 0
Warning: 392 10.10.1.234:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=11962
req_src_ip=10.10.2.6 req_src_port=50135 in_uri=sip:alice@siptest2.com:
5060 out_uri=sip:alice@10.10.2.6:5070 via_cnt==1"
01:17:59.555035 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.5070: UDP, length 814
INVITE sip:alice@10.10.2.6:5070 SIP/2.0
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Contact: <sip:bob@10.10.2.6>;transport=TCP
Max-Forwards: 69
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 195
P-hint: usrloc applied
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 10.10.2.6
t=0 0
m=audio 5000 RTP/AVP 0 4 97
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
a=rtpmap:97 telephone-event/8000
01:17:59.667962 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 364
SIP/2.0 100 Trying
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 0
01:17:59.699680 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 505
SIP/2.0 180 Ringing
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 0
01:17:59.699683 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 728
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070>
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 135
Content-Type: application/sdp
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 192.168.0.3
t=0 0
m=audio 21000 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
01:17:59.700273 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.50135: tcp 440
SIP/2.0 180 Ringing
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 0
01:17:59.700299 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.50135: tcp 663
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070>
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 135
Content-Type: application/sdp
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 192.168.0.3
t=0 0
m=audio 21000 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
01:17:59.804566 IP 10.10.2.6.50135 > 10.10.1.234.sip: tcp 435
ACK sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK59972
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
CSeq: 1 ACK
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Max-Forwards: 70
01:17:59.839493 IP 10.10.2.6.50135 > 10.10.1.234.sip: tcp 435
BYE sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK68444
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
CSeq: 2 BYE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Max-Forwards: 70
01:18:00.199306 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 728
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070>
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 135
Content-Type: application/sdp
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 192.168.0.3
t=0 0
m=audio 21000 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
10 Nov
10 Nov
1:11 p.m.
Hi!
The client which uses TCP is broken. The ACK and BYE are in-dialog
requests and MUST contain the callees Contact: URI as request URI. That
means:
ACK sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070 SIP/2.0
instead of
ACK sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
regards
klaus
Russ Daigle wrote:
I have a scenario where user Alice registered with
OpenSER with UDP port
5070. Then, I have user Bob sending an invite to Alice via the OpenSER
using TCP. Hence, OpenSER is bridging my TCP SIP requests to UDP (and
vice versa for the responses).
Here is the sequence:
Alice ----- TCP Invite -----> OpenSER ---------- UDP Invite ------>
Alice
Alice responds back with 180 ringing, then 200 Ok.
Upon getting the 200 OK, Bob sends an ACK (to complete the INVITE),
followed by an Immediate BYE.
THE TROUBLE IS...... the ACK and the BYE that Bob sends are dropped by
OpenSER, and never forwarded onto Alice!!!! I see nothing wrong with
the messages. WHat is happening?
sip:~ russdaigle$ sudo tcpdump -i en0 -A -q -s 2000 port 5060
Password:
tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode
listening on en0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 2000 bytes
The following shows an sip-invite-bye from mutator using TCP to mjsip (via
OPENSER). Everything after the ACK is dropped and not sent on.
Then, is a similar but UDP exchange. In that case, we get a 404 not found
in response to the BYE!!!
01:17:59.553909 IP 10.10.2.6.50135 > 10.10.1.234.sip: tcp 588
INVITE sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Contact: <sip:bob@10.10.2.6>;transport=TCP
Max-Forwards: 70
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 195
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 10.10.2.6
t=0 0
m=audio 5000 RTP/AVP 0 4 97
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
a=rtpmap:97 telephone-event/8000
01:17:59.554929 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.50135: tcp 536
SIP/2.0 100 trying -- your call is important to us
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Server: OpenSer (1.1.0-notls (i386/darwin))
Content-Length: 0
Warning: 392 10.10.1.234:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=11962
req_src_ip=10.10.2.6 req_src_port=50135
in_uri=sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 out_uri=sip:alice@10.10.2.6:5070
via_cnt==1"
01:17:59.555035 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.5070: UDP, length 814
INVITE sip:alice@10.10.2.6:5070 SIP/2.0
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Contact: <sip:bob@10.10.2.6>;transport=TCP
Max-Forwards: 69
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 195
P-hint: usrloc applied
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 10.10.2.6
t=0 0
m=audio 5000 RTP/AVP 0 4 97
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
a=rtpmap:97 telephone-event/8000
01:17:59.667962 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 364
SIP/2.0 100 Trying
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 0
01:17:59.699680 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 505
SIP/2.0 180 Ringing
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 0
01:17:59.699683 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 728
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070>
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 135
Content-Type: application/sdp
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 192.168.0.3
t=0 0
m=audio 21000 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
01:17:59.700273 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.50135: tcp 440
SIP/2.0 180 Ringing
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 0
01:17:59.700299 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.50135: tcp 663
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070>
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 135
Content-Type: application/sdp
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 192.168.0.3
t=0 0
m=audio 21000 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
01:17:59.804566 IP 10.10.2.6.50135 > 10.10.1.234.sip: tcp 435
ACK sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK59972
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
CSeq: 1 ACK
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Max-Forwards: 70
01:17:59.839493 IP 10.10.2.6.50135 > 10.10.1.234.sip: tcp 435
BYE sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK68444
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
CSeq: 2 BYE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Max-Forwards: 70
01:18:00.199306 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 728
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070>
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 135
Content-Type: application/sdp
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 192.168.0.3
t=0 0
m=audio 21000 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
--
Klaus Darilion
nic.at
7:08 p.m.
Hi Klaus,
Thanks for the insightful response.
Is that truly a MUST in the RFC definition of the word? (I couldn't
find the sections in the RFC that you alluded to.)
I see other call flows in the basic call flows RFC does as you
mention. My concern is that stateless or transaction stateful
proxies may not now how to forward the "alice@192.168.0.3:5070"
request; in fact, it is likely they won't!
I presume my client should only do as you mention if the client is
going to contact the other endpoint directly for the rest of the
dialog (rather than going through the proxy)? Sending a message to
the proxy where request-URI mentioned an IP address the proxy doesn't
know is bad, and furthermore specifying a port in the request-URI
that is not the same as the port for proxy is listening on also
sounds bad.
Especially remember in this case there was a record-route: forcing to
continue going through the proxy!!!! Therefore, I would think that
changing the request-URI could cause problems with the proxy.
If the record-route headers were not present (other cases I'm
testing), would it be permissible for me to continue going though the
proxy anyways rather than reverting to sending directly to the
endpoint for the remainder of the dialog????
Regards and Thanks!!!
-Russ
On Nov 10, 2006, at 3:11 AM, Klaus Darilion wrote:
Hi!
The client which uses TCP is broken. The ACK and BYE are in-dialog
requests and MUST contain the callees Contact: URI as request URI.
That means:
ACK sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070 SIP/2.0
instead of
ACK sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
regards
klaus
Russ Daigle wrote:
I have a scenario where user Alice registered
with OpenSER with
UDP port 5070. Then, I have user Bob sending an invite to Alice
via the OpenSER using TCP. Hence, OpenSER is bridging my TCP SIP
requests to UDP (and vice versa for the responses).
Here is the sequence:
Alice ----- TCP Invite -----> OpenSER ---------- UDP Invite
------> Alice
Alice responds back with 180 ringing, then 200 Ok.
Upon getting the 200 OK, Bob sends an ACK (to complete the
INVITE), followed by an Immediate BYE.
THE TROUBLE IS...... the ACK and the BYE that Bob sends are
dropped by OpenSER, and never forwarded onto Alice!!!! I see
nothing wrong with the messages. WHat is happening?
sip:~ russdaigle$ sudo tcpdump -i en0 -A -q -s 2000 port 5060
Password:
tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full
protocol decode
listening on en0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 2000
bytes
The following shows an sip-invite-bye from mutator using TCP to
mjsip (via
OPENSER). Everything after the ACK is dropped and not sent on.
Then, is a similar but UDP exchange. In that case, we get a 404
not found
in response to the BYE!!!
01:17:59.553909 IP 10.10.2.6.50135 > 10.10.1.234.sip: tcp 588
INVITE sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Contact: <sip:bob@10.10.2.6>;transport=TCP
Max-Forwards: 70
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 195
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 10.10.2.6
t=0 0
m=audio 5000 RTP/AVP 0 4 97
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
a=rtpmap:97 telephone-event/8000
01:17:59.554929 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.50135: tcp 536
SIP/2.0 100 trying -- your call is important to us
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Server: OpenSer (1.1.0-notls (i386/darwin))
Content-Length: 0
Warning: 392 10.10.1.234:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=11962
req_src_ip=10.10.2.6 req_src_port=50135
in_uri=sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060
out_uri=sip:alice@10.10.2.6:5070 via_cnt==1"
01:17:59.555035 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.5070: UDP, length 814
INVITE sip:alice@10.10.2.6:5070 SIP/2.0
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Contact: <sip:bob@10.10.2.6>;transport=TCP
Max-Forwards: 69
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 195
P-hint: usrloc applied
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 10.10.2.6
t=0 0
m=audio 5000 RTP/AVP 0 4 97
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=rtpmap:4 G723/8000/1
a=rtpmap:97 telephone-event/8000
01:17:59.667962 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 364
SIP/2.0 100 Trying
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 0
01:17:59.699680 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 505
SIP/2.0 180 Ringing
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 0
01:17:59.699683 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 728
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070>
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 135
Content-Type: application/sdp
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 192.168.0.3
t=0 0
m=audio 21000 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
01:17:59.700273 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.50135: tcp 440
SIP/2.0 180 Ringing
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 0
01:17:59.700299 IP 10.10.1.234.sip > 10.10.2.6.50135: tcp 663
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070>
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 135
Content-Type: application/sdp
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 192.168.0.3
t=0 0
m=audio 21000 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
01:17:59.804566 IP 10.10.2.6.50135 > 10.10.1.234.sip: tcp 435
ACK sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK59972
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
CSeq: 1 ACK
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Max-Forwards: 70
01:17:59.839493 IP 10.10.2.6.50135 > 10.10.1.234.sip: tcp 435
BYE sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK68444
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
CSeq: 2 BYE
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
Max-Forwards: 70
01:18:00.199306 IP 10.10.2.6.5070 > 10.10.1.234.sip: UDP, length 728
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.234;branch=z9hG4bK9316.e5ab8ce2.0;i=b1
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.2.6:50135;branch=z9hG4bK85478043
Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.234;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
Record-Route: <sip:
10.10.1.234;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=fromhackblah>
To: Alice <sip:alice@siptest2.com:5060>;tag=7c452a3254b2e183
From: Bob <sip:bob@siptest2.com>;tag=fromhackblah
Call-ID: SYRGNUXWKNZNXXPXUAMUTJXXPPMXWKVJFAXUNUUTGG(a)musecurity.com
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:alice@192.168.0.3:5070>
Server: mjsip stack 1.6
Content-Length: 135
Content-Type: application/sdp
v=0
o=- 817933771 817933775 IN IP4 10.10.2.6
s=darkness
c=IN IP4 192.168.0.3
t=0 0
m=audio 21000 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
--
Klaus Darilion
nic.at
7:32 p.m.
Russ Daigle wrote:
Hi Klaus,
Thanks for the insightful response.
Is that truly a MUST in the RFC definition of the word? (I couldn't
find the sections in the RFC that you alluded to.)
12.2.1.1 Generating the Request
I see other call flows in the basic call flows RFC does as you
mention. My concern is that stateless or transaction stateful proxies
may not now how to forward the "alice@192.168.0.3:5070" request; in
it is simple - just forward to 192.168.0.3:5070. Every proxy can do this.
fact, it is likely they won't!
All the information needed for routing is available. the final
destination is in the request URI and the intermediate hops are in the
Route headers.
I presume my client should only do as you mention if
the client is going
to contact the other endpoint directly for the rest of the dialog
wrong
(rather than going through the proxy)? Sending a
message to the proxy
where request-URI mentioned an IP address the proxy doesn't know is bad,
no, it is good. The proxy does not have to lookup the location of the
request URI again. It it works also in cases where for example the BYE
is routed through other proxies.
and furthermore specifying a port in the request-URI
that is not the
same as the port for proxy is listening on also sounds bad.
it is the port where the client is listening - the request URI is the
final destination. In your scenario, when you insert again the AoR in
the request URI, the proxy is unable to forward.
Especially remember in this case there was a
record-route: forcing to
continue going through the proxy!!!! Therefore, I would think that
changing the request-URI could cause problems with the proxy.
My clients do change the request URI and I have no problems in the
proxy. Your client does not change the request URI and has problem in
the proxy....so guess who is right ;-)
If the record-route headers were not present (other
cases I'm testing),
would it be permissible for me to continue going though the proxy
you could do and maybe it works, but there is no guarantee as it is not
standard conform.
anyways rather than reverting to sending directly to
the endpoint for
the remainder of the dialog????
regards
klaus
6590
days inactive
6590
days old
3 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Klaus Darilion -
Russ Daigle