4 Dec
2003
4 Dec
'03
8:09 p.m.
Jan,
Thank you for the response.
The longer I use the SER proxy server, the more uses I
find for it.
What I am currently envisioning is this:
I run a PBX PROXY server for a specific business
customer. This customer has a private naming (numbering)
plan. The names of the UA devices are 101, 102, 103, etc..
These are 'extension numbers'.
I would like to be able to make the PBX 'pretend' it is
the phone. It will send a REGISTER to the GATEWAY, and then subsequent
INVITES for that number will be sent to the PBX. The PBX will
determine how to deliver the call using local rules on the
SER proxy. The rules will be something like:
business days between 9am and 5pm forward all incoming calls to x100.
If extension 100 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to extension 101.
If extension 101 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to voice mail.
And a million other things.
I realize that I can forward the call from the GATEWAY
to the PBX, but, I think it would be MUCH cleaner if
I could tell the SER PBX engine to REGISTER a number....
Make sense?
---greg
Greg,
it would be possible with some shell script magic. It is possible to
send a REGISTER message using the fifo interface.
Before we dig into into it, let me ask what is the reason for doing
something like that ? Can't you simply forward the SIP messages from
GATEWAY to PBX and if PBX is off or crashed then the GATEWAY will send
"Request timeout" to the PSTN (instead of 404) ? Or am I missing
something ?
Jan.
On 03-12 21:59, Greg Fausak wrote:
Hello,
I have a SER server, it has 2 phones
registered to it. The phones are 300000
and 300100. The registration works fine, and
I can place calls between them. I am calling this
my 'PBX'.
I have another SER server that can connect to
a PSTN. I can register my phone number with it,
and I can make and receive calls from the PSTN.
Let's say that phone number is 2145551212(a)addaline.com.
I'm calling this my 'GATEWAY'.
OK, here is the tricky part. I would like to make
the SER 'PBX' *REGISTER* 2145551212(a)addaline.com with
the SER GATEWAY ... just like
it is a UA. So an incoming call to 2145551212 would
get delivered to the SER PBX, and I'll figure out which
extension gets the call with local rules. For very
simplistic delivery at the PBX I can alias 2145551212 as
300000.
If the PBX crashes, or is turned off, the 2145551212
registration will eventually evaporate.
Anyway, I can't figure out anyway to get SERPBX to register
with SER GATEWAY.
Is this possible?
---greg
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
4 Dec
4 Dec
8:42 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] REGISTER from SER
Superuser wrote:
Jan,
Thank you for the response.
The longer I use the SER proxy server, the more uses I
find for it.
What I am currently envisioning is this:
I run a PBX PROXY server for a specific business
customer. This customer has a private naming (numbering)
plan. The names of the UA devices are 101, 102, 103, etc..
These are 'extension numbers'.
I would like to be able to make the PBX 'pretend' it is
the phone. It will send a REGISTER to the GATEWAY, and then subsequent
INVITES for that number will be sent to the PBX. The PBX will
determine how to deliver the call using local rules on the
SER proxy. The rules will be something like:
business days between 9am and 5pm forward all incoming calls to x100.
If extension 100 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to extension 101.
If extension 101 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to voice mail.
And a million other things.
I realize that I can forward the call from the GATEWAY
to the PBX, but, I think it would be MUCH cleaner if
I could tell the SER PBX engine to REGISTER a number....
With the risk of being
bashed on this list, I would propose that you use Asterisk
as a PBX. It can register to SER, it's not a full-featured SIP proxy as SER, but
have the functions you need on the PBX level. Voicemail, conferencing, call groups
and a lot more. SER and Asterisk is a good combination in the scenario you describe.
/Olle
10:28 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] REGISTER from SER
No, you will be not bashed. Anything related to SIP is accepted on the
list. And because Asterisk is used quite often with SER, mentioning it
here is perfectly fine.
This list is not strictly SER-centric because SER is just a part of
the whole infrastructure that people try to set up.
Jan.
On 04-12 19:42, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
With the risk of being bashed on this list, I would
propose that you use
Asterisk
as a PBX. It can register to SER, it's not a full-featured SIP proxy as
SER, but
have the functions you need on the PBX level. Voicemail, conferencing, call
groups
and a lot more. SER and Asterisk is a good combination in the scenario you
describe.
/Olle
10:48 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] REGISTER from SER
Olle E. Johansson wrote:
Superuser wrote:
Maybe this is a stupid question, but would it be possible to use SER and
Asterisk together to provide (group) call-pickup functionality? I know
Asterisk can do it, and I know SER can't do it.
Maybe forking the INVITE to both the user and Asterisk?
Geert
Jan,
Thank you for the response.
The longer I use the SER proxy server, the more uses I
find for it.
What I am currently envisioning is this:
I run a PBX PROXY server for a specific business
customer. This customer has a private naming (numbering)
plan. The names of the UA devices are 101, 102, 103, etc..
These are 'extension numbers'.
I would like to be able to make the PBX 'pretend' it is
the phone. It will send a REGISTER to the GATEWAY, and then subsequent
INVITES for that number will be sent to the PBX. The PBX will
determine how to deliver the call using local rules on the
SER proxy. The rules will be something like:
business days between 9am and 5pm forward all incoming calls to x100.
If extension 100 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to extension 101.
If extension 101 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to voice mail.
And a million other things.
I realize that I can forward the call from the GATEWAY
to the PBX, but, I think it would be MUCH cleaner if
I could tell the SER PBX engine to REGISTER a number....
With the risk of being bashed on this list, I would propose that you
use Asterisk
as a PBX. It can register to SER, it's not a full-featured SIP proxy
as SER, but
have the functions you need on the PBX level. Voicemail, conferencing,
call groups
and a lot more. SER and Asterisk is a good combination in the scenario
you describe.
11:22 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] Re: SER & ASterisk /new subject/
Geert Nijpels wrote:
Interesting question.
Who's picking up? SIP users on SER or extensions
on Asterisk?
/O
Olle E. Johansson wrote:
With the risk
of being bashed on this list, I would propose that you
use Asterisk
as a PBX. It can register to SER, it's not a full-featured SIP proxy
as SER, but
have the functions you need on the PBX level. Voicemail, conferencing,
call groups
and a lot more. SER and Asterisk is a good combination in the scenario
you describe.
Maybe this is a stupid question, but would it be possible to use SER and
Asterisk together to provide (group) call-pickup functionality? I know
Asterisk can do it, and I know SER can't do it.
Maybe forking the INVITE to both the user and Asterisk?
11:47 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] Re: SER & ASterisk /new subject/
Olle E. Johansson wrote:
Geert Nijpels wrote:
Interesting question. Who's picking up? SIP users on SER or extensions
on Asterisk?
/O
Well I guess with a ser proxy in the network you don't want to register
with asterisk. Maybe a call can be placed in a hold queue in asterisk
and when a special extension is called, this can be catched with ser and
maybe a REFER (ctd.sh?) request can be generated to asterisk?
Probably my imagination has gone wild:)
Geert
Olle E. Johansson wrote:
With the
risk of being bashed on this list, I would propose that you
use Asterisk
as a PBX. It can register to SER, it's not a full-featured SIP proxy
as SER, but
have the functions you need on the PBX level. Voicemail,
conferencing, call groups
and a lot more. SER and Asterisk is a good combination in the
scenario you describe.
Maybe this is a stupid question, but would it be possible to use SER
and Asterisk together to provide (group) call-pickup functionality? I
know Asterisk can do it, and I know SER can't do it.
Maybe forking the INVITE to both the user and Asterisk?
10:58 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] REGISTER from SER
Greg,
I think I understand your scenario well. What I am not sure about is if
using REGISTER in this case is a good idea.
What I didn't mention in my previous email is that there will be
problem with authentication. REGISTER messages should be always
authenticated because they contain sensitive information and without
authentication bad guys can hijack calls to other people.
It is possible to send a REGISTER message through the FIFO interface, but if
the REGISTER message gets challenged then there is no easy way (read it
requires much more scripting/coding) to build a proper digest reply and
re-send the message. It can be written, but I am not sure it is worth it.
I think that you can achieve the same by modifying usrloc/aliases by hand
and then the PBXes do not have to register.
Note that some administrative actions would be necessary even if PBXes
would register with GATEWAY because you would have to provision your GATEWAY
server with passwords they will be using.
So it will work like this:
When you install a new PBX for one of your customers, you need to create
an account for his anyway. When you create the account you can create
also a permanent usrloc record so the new PBX doesn't have to register.
All calls to the permanent usrloc records will be then sent to the new
PBX. If the PBX is only then the request will time out on GATEWAY and
the GATEWAY will send a 4xx to the PSTN.
So it works exactly as you describe, the only difference is that usrloc
records will be not created from REGISTER messages sent by PBXes, but by
you when creating the account.
Usrloc entries can be created/deleted in serweb or using the serctl utility.
Does it make sense to you ? (The problem with PBXes sending
REGISTER to GATEWAY is digest authentication).
Jan.
On 04-12 12:09, Superuser wrote:
Jan,
Thank you for the response.
The longer I use the SER proxy server, the more uses I
find for it.
What I am currently envisioning is this:
I run a PBX PROXY server for a specific business
customer. This customer has a private naming (numbering)
plan. The names of the UA devices are 101, 102, 103, etc..
These are 'extension numbers'.
I would like to be able to make the PBX 'pretend' it is
the phone. It will send a REGISTER to the GATEWAY, and then subsequent
INVITES for that number will be sent to the PBX. The PBX will
determine how to deliver the call using local rules on the
SER proxy. The rules will be something like:
business days between 9am and 5pm forward all incoming calls to x100.
If extension 100 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to extension 101.
If extension 101 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to voice mail.
And a million other things.
I realize that I can forward the call from the GATEWAY
to the PBX, but, I think it would be MUCH cleaner if
I could tell the SER PBX engine to REGISTER a number....
Make sense?
---greg
>
>Greg,
>
>it would be possible with some shell script magic. It is possible to
>send a REGISTER message using the fifo interface.
>
>Before we dig into into it, let me ask what is the reason for doing
>something like that ? Can't you simply forward the SIP messages from
>GATEWAY to PBX and if PBX is off or crashed then the GATEWAY will send
>"Request timeout" to the PSTN (instead of 404) ? Or am I missing
>something ?
>
> Jan.
>
>On 03-12 21:59, Greg Fausak wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have a SER server, it has 2 phones
>> registered to it. The phones are 300000
>> and 300100. The registration works fine, and
>> I can place calls between them. I am calling this
>> my 'PBX'.
>>
>> I have another SER server that can connect to
>> a PSTN. I can register my phone number with it,
>> and I can make and receive calls from the PSTN.
>> Let's say that phone number is 2145551212(a)addaline.com.
>> I'm calling this my 'GATEWAY'.
>>
>> OK, here is the tricky part. I would like to make
>> the SER 'PBX' *REGISTER* 2145551212(a)addaline.com with
>> the SER GATEWAY ... just like
>> it is a UA. So an incoming call to 2145551212 would
>> get delivered to the SER PBX, and I'll figure out which
>> extension gets the call with local rules. For very
>> simplistic delivery at the PBX I can alias 2145551212 as
>> 300000.
>>
>> If the PBX crashes, or is turned off, the 2145551212
>> registration will eventually evaporate.
>>
>> Anyway, I can't figure out anyway to get SERPBX to register
>> with SER GATEWAY.
>>
>> Is this possible?
>>
>> ---greg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Serusers mailing list
>> serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
>_______________________________________________
>Serusers mailing list
>serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
>http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
5 Dec
5 Dec
1:07 a.m.
New subject: [Serusers] REGISTER from SER
At 07:09 PM 12/4/2003, Superuser wrote:
Jan,
Thank you for the response.
The longer I use the SER proxy server, the more uses I
find for it.
What I am currently envisioning is this:
I run a PBX PROXY server for a specific business
customer. This customer has a private naming (numbering)
plan. The names of the UA devices are 101, 102, 103, etc..
These are 'extension numbers'.
I would like to be able to make the PBX 'pretend' it is
the phone. It will send a REGISTER to the GATEWAY, and then subsequent
INVITES for that number will be sent to the PBX. The PBX will
determine how to deliver the call using local rules on the
SER proxy. The rules will be something like:
business days between 9am and 5pm forward all incoming calls to x100.
If extension 100 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to extension 101.
If extension 101 is busy (or doesn't answer), roll to voice mail.
And a million other things.
I realize that I can forward the call from the GATEWAY
to the PBX, but, I think it would be MUCH cleaner if
I could tell the SER PBX engine to REGISTER a number....
If it is just about registering a simple number, why can't you provision
a permanent contact using SERCTL? Or if it is about forwarding a number
block, can't you just set up a condition like if (uri=~"sip:9721111.*")...
-jiri
7663
days inactive
7663
days old
7 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Geert Nijpels -
Jan Janak -
Jiri Kuthan -
Olle E. Johansson -
root＠august.net