Re: [SR-Users] Parallel forking and rtpengine handling

[George Diamantopoulos]

On a side note, I think I might have found a bug for rtpengine_manage():
I'm under the impression that if called from within a branch_failure_route,
it will do an offer instead of a delete. Do you confirm and is this
intentional?

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 11:06, Sebastian Damm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 8:29 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>  wrote:
> > A remark for kamailio transaction states point of view: in failure route
> the entire transaction is in failed state, so there is not active branch,
> so at that point it should delete all (previous) rtpengine
> sessions/branches.
>
> This is what I had in mind. I don't think I end up in failure route if
> one branch is answered. My Question was, how to handle the canceled
> branch.
>
> > As I got it, the use of via-branch flag for deleting a session makes
> sense in event route for branch-failure, when other branches can still be
> active or one was answered.
>
> Do branches that get cancelled due to another branch answering the
> call go through the branch failure route?
>
> > Also in the case of parallel forking, if via-branch is not give to
> rtpengine offer command, does the 2nd (and the next) rtpengine offer
> command overwrite the previous one, so the rtpengine keeps only the data
> from the last one?
>
> We stumbled upon this problem only because we used rtpengine without
> the branch parameter. And what we saw was that the second
> rtpengine_offer overwrote the first one, making the first branch
> impossible to be answered in certain scenarios.
>
> Regards and thanks for all the answers so far.
> Sebastian
>
> --
> Sebastian Damm
> Voice Engineer
> __
> sipgate GmbH
> Gladbacher Straße 74 | 40219 Düsseldorf
>
> ___
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

Re: [SR-Users] Parallel forking and rtpengine handling

[Sebastian Damm]

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 8:29 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla
 wrote:
> A remark for kamailio transaction states point of view: in failure route the 
> entire transaction is in failed state, so there is not active branch, so at 
> that point it should delete all (previous) rtpengine sessions/branches.

This is what I had in mind. I don't think I end up in failure route if
one branch is answered. My Question was, how to handle the canceled
branch.

> As I got it, the use of via-branch flag for deleting a session makes sense in 
> event route for branch-failure, when other branches can still be active or 
> one was answered.

Do branches that get cancelled due to another branch answering the
call go through the branch failure route?

> Also in the case of parallel forking, if via-branch is not give to rtpengine 
> offer command, does the 2nd (and the next) rtpengine offer command overwrite 
> the previous one, so the rtpengine keeps only the data from the last one?

We stumbled upon this problem only because we used rtpengine without
the branch parameter. And what we saw was that the second
rtpengine_offer overwrote the first one, making the first branch
impossible to be answered in certain scenarios.

Regards and thanks for all the answers so far.
Sebastian

-- 
Sebastian Damm
Voice Engineer
__
sipgate GmbH
Gladbacher Straße 74 | 40219 Düsseldorf

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

Re: [SR-Users] Parallel forking and rtpengine handling

[Richard Fuchs]

On 22/01/2020 14.26, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:


Btw, a few questions for further clarifications: if a call has 
parallel forking and rtpengine offer is executed for each branch, one 
is answered, but the other branch-sessions are not not deleted, what 
does rtpengine? It times them out, or keeps them for the duration of 
the call?


Those branches would remain open. When the call is finished, it will 
depend on how the delete is executed: if the delete is done from the 
side which branched the call (side A, caller), then the entire call 
including other branches are deleted. If the delete is done from the 
opposite side (B, one of the branches), the other branches would still 
remain open, keeping the entire call alive. The call would then 
eventually time out depending on the config, but it might take a while.


Also in the case of parallel forking, if via-branch is not give to 
rtpengine offer command, does the 2nd (and the next) rtpengine offer 
command overwrite the previous one, so the rtpengine keeps only the 
data from the last one?


Correct, with possibly some undesired side effects depending on which 
flags were used (e.g codec changes).


Cheers


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

Re: [SR-Users] Parallel forking and rtpengine handling

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

On 22.01.20 19:19, Richard Fuchs wrote:
> On 22/01/2020 13.15, George Diamantopoulos wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 18:28, Richard Fuchs > > wrote:
>>
>> On 22/01/2020 11.06, Sebastian Damm wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > our scenario is the following: We have two clients registered
>> to our
>> > Kamailio server, one with a TLS capable phone, one via
>> websocket. Now,
>> > when a call comes in, the call is forked and is sent out to both
>> > clients. rtpengine handling is done in the branch route, so
>> there are
>> > two offers, and we use the "via-branch" parameter.
>> >
>> > Now, when one branch answers the call, what happens to the other
>> > branch? I there a way to delete the other branch? How and in which
>> > route? Or does Kamailio do this automatically?
>>
>> You do it the same way as you handle an answer: You issue a
>> delete with
>> the via-branch option.
>>
>> Doesn't this happen automatically when one uses rtpengine_manage() in
>> the failure_route?
>
> I would think it does, as long as you supply the via-branch parameter.
>

A remark for kamailio transaction states point of view: in failure route
the entire transaction is in failed state, so there is not active
branch, so at that point it should delete all (previous) rtpengine
sessions/branches.

Re-routing to a new destinations should go via a branch route where a
new session is initiated in the rtpengine.

As I got it, the use of via-branch flag for deleting a session makes
sense in event route for branch-failure, when other branches can still
be active or one was answered.

Btw, a few questions for further clarifications: if a call has parallel
forking and rtpengine offer is executed for each branch, one is
answered, but the other branch-sessions are not not deleted, what does
rtpengine? It times them out, or keeps them for the duration of the call?

Also in the case of parallel forking, if via-branch is not give to
rtpengine offer command, does the 2nd (and the next) rtpengine offer
command overwrite the previous one, so the rtpengine keeps only the data
from the last one?

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio Advanced Training - March 9-11, 2020, Berlin - www.asipto.com
Kamailio World Conference - April 27-29, 2020, in Berlin -- 
www.kamailioworld.com

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

Re: [SR-Users] Parallel forking and rtpengine handling

[Richard Fuchs]

On 22/01/2020 13.15, George Diamantopoulos wrote:



On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 18:28, Richard Fuchs > wrote:


On 22/01/2020 11.06, Sebastian Damm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> our scenario is the following: We have two clients registered to our
> Kamailio server, one with a TLS capable phone, one via
websocket. Now,
> when a call comes in, the call is forked and is sent out to both
> clients. rtpengine handling is done in the branch route, so
there are
> two offers, and we use the "via-branch" parameter.
>
> Now, when one branch answers the call, what happens to the other
> branch? I there a way to delete the other branch? How and in which
> route? Or does Kamailio do this automatically?

You do it the same way as you handle an answer: You issue a delete
with
the via-branch option.

Doesn't this happen automatically when one uses rtpengine_manage() in 
the failure_route?


I would think it does, as long as you supply the via-branch parameter.

Cheers

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

Re: [SR-Users] Parallel forking and rtpengine handling

[Yuriy Gorlichenko]

It is. In this case manage = delete

On Wed, 22 Jan 2020, 19:16 George Diamantopoulos, 
wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 18:28, Richard Fuchs  wrote:
>
>> On 22/01/2020 11.06, Sebastian Damm wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > our scenario is the following: We have two clients registered to our
>> > Kamailio server, one with a TLS capable phone, one via websocket. Now,
>> > when a call comes in, the call is forked and is sent out to both
>> > clients. rtpengine handling is done in the branch route, so there are
>> > two offers, and we use the "via-branch" parameter.
>> >
>> > Now, when one branch answers the call, what happens to the other
>> > branch? I there a way to delete the other branch? How and in which
>> > route? Or does Kamailio do this automatically?
>>
>> You do it the same way as you handle an answer: You issue a delete with
>> the via-branch option.
>>
> Doesn't this happen automatically when one uses rtpengine_manage() in the
> failure_route?
>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>> sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>
> ___
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

Re: [SR-Users] Parallel forking and rtpengine handling

[George Diamantopoulos]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 18:28, Richard Fuchs  wrote:

> On 22/01/2020 11.06, Sebastian Damm wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > our scenario is the following: We have two clients registered to our
> > Kamailio server, one with a TLS capable phone, one via websocket. Now,
> > when a call comes in, the call is forked and is sent out to both
> > clients. rtpengine handling is done in the branch route, so there are
> > two offers, and we use the "via-branch" parameter.
> >
> > Now, when one branch answers the call, what happens to the other
> > branch? I there a way to delete the other branch? How and in which
> > route? Or does Kamailio do this automatically?
>
> You do it the same way as you handle an answer: You issue a delete with
> the via-branch option.
>
Doesn't this happen automatically when one uses rtpengine_manage() in the
failure_route?

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

[SR-Users] Parallel forking and rtpengine handling

[Sebastian Damm]

Hi,

our scenario is the following: We have two clients registered to our
Kamailio server, one with a TLS capable phone, one via websocket. Now,
when a call comes in, the call is forked and is sent out to both
clients. rtpengine handling is done in the branch route, so there are
two offers, and we use the "via-branch" parameter.

Now, when one branch answers the call, what happens to the other
branch? I there a way to delete the other branch? How and in which
route? Or does Kamailio do this automatically?

I'm happy for a hint.

Regards,
Sebastian

-- 
Sebastian Damm
Voice Engineer
__
sipgate GmbH

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