Thanks Daniel,

Your snippet code must be used in proxy/registrar or on LB ?

The proxy/registrar should follow the same behaviour with the SBC and the lb ? Loose_route every request from sbc and dispatch request from lb to sbc ?

Regards.

2018-01-30 10:51 GMT+01:00 Daniel Tryba d.tryba@pocos.nl:

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 10:22:39AM +0100, Loic Chabert wrote:

...

I have a setup configurered has diagram below:

UAC -> Proxy LB (proxy lb) -> Proxy Router/registrar (proxy B) ->

Asterisk

...

SBC

My UAC is SIPP and sending a classic call scenario: INVITE - ACK - BYE.

But i have some trouble to understand which queries should be loose

routed

...

and which queries should be dispatched by dispatcher module.

Having a similar setup: -all messages not from the ipadresses of "Proxy Router/registrar" machines are DISPATCHed -everything else is loose_route()-ed

...

My first invite request has been dispatched to proxy B by proxy LB. After that, ACK and BYE request should be loose_routed or should be dispatched as other request ? My proxy B is a statefull proxy, logging

cdrs

...

and other stuff ...

From my point of view, subsequent request should be loose_routed to keep dialog informations consistent. My subsequent requests have record-route headers. Should i use theses headers to route my calls ?

Yes, all subsequent message cvan be handled within dialog. Your config could be something really close to the basic kamailio config (with WITH_NAT defined)

request_route { route(REQINIT);

    route(NATDETECT);
    route(WITHINDLG);

    if (is_method("INVITE|SUBSCRIBE"))
    {
            record_route();
    }

    if(!is_in_subnet($si, "x.y.z.a/bc"))
    {
            add_path_received();

            ds_select_dst(1, 0);

            t_on_failure("RTF_DISPATCH");
    }
    else
    {
            remove_hf("Route");

            loose_route();
    }

    route(RELAY);

}

...

Loose routing features only work with "Route" header ? What is the difference beetwen Route headers and Record-route headers ?

I'll leave this answer to the experts :)

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

If i check my ACK messages sent from my LB to my proxy, to Route headers is present. So my ack has not been forwarded to my SBC. So i can't route all subsequent INVITE messages without using dispatcher for ACK messages.

ACK messages are in the same INVITE transaction ?

My SBC is asterisk, and does not insert Record-route headers. Is it a normal behaviour for an SBC ?

Regards.

2018-01-30 16:00 GMT+01:00 Daniel Tryba d.tryba@pocos.nl:

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 11:14:18AM +0100, Loic Chabert wrote:

...

Thanks Daniel,

Your snippet code must be used in proxy/registrar or on LB ?

It's for the loadbalancer. The registrar also is a near default supplied config, only added support for Path to be used for REGISTERs and dispatcher.

...

The proxy/registrar should follow the same behaviour with the SBC and the lb ? Loose_route every request from sbc and dispatch request from lb to

sbc

...

?

As far as I understand it is simply based on loose routing for all messages after dispatching INVITEs with ds_*.

BTW my SBCs don't initiate calls to the registrar/proxies but to the loadbalancers (SIP domain via DNS/SRV/NAPTR)

UACa -> LB -> REGISTRAR/Proxy -> LB -> UACb UACa -> LB -> REGISTRAR/Proxy -> SBC -> UACb

UACa -> SBC -> LB -> REGISTRAR/Proxy -> LB -> UACb UACa -> SBC -> LB -> REGISTRAR/Proxy -> SBC -> UACb

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users