Re: [Kamailio-Users] Handling 302s
Well, I got the 407 solved - I didn't have my loopback or enet address in
the trusted table.
So, I am closer. Next step is to get a B2BUA installed, like rtpproxy to
handle the audio, since I don't proxy any audio. Any examples out there
where I can initiate the audio for this type of call? Again, I don't
currently nor do I want to handle the audio for 'every' call.
Thanks,
-graham
On 10/12/08 12:45 PM, "Graham Wooden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gotcha. Well, I re-ran the capture on another test call and ended the
> capture a few seconds after I hung up, and still shows the same path.
>
> Ok, here is my proxy_challenge; I put that xlog in it, and sure enough it's
> entering. Now, I have my provider's IP in my trusted table, so I am not
> sure why it's challenging...
>
>
>
> if (!(method=="REGISTER"))
> {
> if (!allow_trusted())
> {
> if (!proxy_authorize("", "subscriber")) {
> $var(debug) = proxy_authorize("", "subscriber");
> xlog("L_INFO", "Proxy authentication failed - M=$rm
> RURI=$ru F=$fu T=$tu IP=$si ID=$ci\n");
> proxy_challenge("", "0");
> exit;
> }
> fix_nated_sdp("11");
> consume_credentials();
> # at this point caller is authenticated
> }
> }
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10/12/08 12:32 PM, "Juha Heinanen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Graham Wooden writes:
>>
>>> Yeah, I see that 407 Proxy Auth too, but I am not sure where to check for
>>> that.
>>>
>>> Here is my only challenge statement:
>>>
>>> if (is_method("REGISTER"))
>>> {
>>> if (!www_authorize("", "subscriber"))
>>> {
>>> www_challenge("", "0");
>>> exit;
>>> }
>>
>> 407 comes from proxy_challenge. either your config has one or not all
>> packets were shown in capture.
>>
>> this starts to consume too many cycles that are away from writing code.
>> dig into your config file and make sure that wireshark captures all
>> packets.
>>
>> -- juha
>
>
>
> ___
> 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
Re: [Kamailio-Users] In-dialog request correlation without loose routing?
Klaus Darilion wrote: > > > Alex Balashov schrieb: >> Klaus Darilion wrote: >>> I guess as long as all the clients are loose_routers (final target in >>> the RURI) it will work even without loose_route, if you only have 1 >>> proxy between the clients. >>> >>> Of course the forwarded in-dialgo requests will still have an Route >>> header which is actually not RFC conform but ignored by allmost all >>> SIP clients. >> >> So, you're saying it's better to run loose_route() to have it consume >> this extraneous Route: header? > > Better? hard to say > > But at least more elegant and standard conform Well, thank you, I appreciate the insight. :) -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Kamailio-Users] In-dialog request correlation without loose routing?
Alex Balashov schrieb: > Klaus Darilion wrote: >> I guess as long as all the clients are loose_routers (final target in >> the RURI) it will work even without loose_route, if you only have 1 >> proxy between the clients. >> >> Of course the forwarded in-dialgo requests will still have an Route >> header which is actually not RFC conform but ignored by allmost all >> SIP clients. > > So, you're saying it's better to run loose_route() to have it consume > this extraneous Route: header? Better? hard to say But at least more elegant and standard conform klaus ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Kamailio-Users] In-dialog request correlation without loose routing?
Klaus Darilion wrote: > I guess as long as all the clients are loose_routers (final target in > the RURI) it will work even without loose_route, if you only have 1 > proxy between the clients. > > Of course the forwarded in-dialgo requests will still have an Route > header which is actually not RFC conform but ignored by allmost all SIP > clients. So, you're saying it's better to run loose_route() to have it consume this extraneous Route: header? -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Kamailio-Users] In-dialog request correlation without loose routing?
I guess as long as all the clients are loose_routers (final target in the RURI) it will work even without loose_route, if you only have 1 proxy between the clients. Of course the forwarded in-dialgo requests will still have an Route header which is actually not RFC conform but ignored by allmost all SIP clients. I would say: dirty but it works in closed setups (no public Internet telephony) klaus Alex Balashov schrieb: > Klaus Darilion wrote: > >> So do you perform lookup() also for in_dialog requests? > > When necessary. > > Otherwise, A endpoint just provides the URI of the Z-end of the > signaling path for the domain and I make special exceptions to relay > that as long as I have the Call-ID stored somewhere, which I do. > ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Kamailio-Users] In-dialog request correlation without loose routing?
Klaus Darilion wrote: > So do you perform lookup() also for in_dialog requests? When necessary. Otherwise, A endpoint just provides the URI of the Z-end of the signaling path for the domain and I make special exceptions to relay that as long as I have the Call-ID stored somewhere, which I do. -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Kamailio-Users] In-dialog request correlation without loose routing?
Klaus Darilion wrote: > Alex Balashov schrieb: >> BTW, I do think it would be a good idea for the dialog module to >> export these functions directly into the script symbols so they can be >> called that way. I do not like to do loose routing unnecessarily / >> when I have no use for it. > > How does your setup work without loose_route? The proxy sees in-dialog > requests only if you record_route. If you do record_route(), you have to > use loose_route for correct routing. You can't have one without the > other (except you do manual routing also for in-dialog requests) That's generally what I always do - manual routing for in-dialog requests. I was not aware that loose_route() is required for correct routing of in-dialog requests when they are record-routed back through the proxy. I think one of the reasons why this may not be much of an issue for me is because my proxy applications generally always have the proxy as the URI domain - I won't relay for !uri == myself. So, after the initial INVITE is rewritten, the UAC/UAS cores on either side send subsequent in-dialog requests to the same URI they sent the INVITE to. I would, of course, be eager to hear any methodological insights you may offer about what I'm doing incorrectly. -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Kamailio-Users] Openser 1.3.2 to Kamailio 1.4.1 Upgrade Problem. Pls HELP.
On Friday 17 October 2008, Henning Westerholt wrote: > I'll send you a link to the docs when i finished it later. Hi George, you find the SQL statements to update your tables on the porting docs in our wiki: http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/install:1.3.x-to-1.4.0 Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties. Cheers, Henning ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Kamailio-Users] Openser 1.3.2 to Kamailio 1.4.1 Upgrade Problem. Pls HELP.
On Thursday 16 October 2008, George Lee wrote: > I am upgrading openser 1.3.2 to kamailio 1.4.1 and I am having this > problem: > > Oct 16 18:20:25 dev-ser-01 /sbin/kamailio[6466]: > ERROR:core:db_check_table_version: invalid version 2 for table > presentity found, expected 3 (check table structure and table > "version") > > Is there any database schema change to the presentity table? If so, > how do I upgrade the presentity table? I tried to run the kamdbctl > script to upgrade the database and I got access denied with 'root' > user. How do I run kamdbctl with 'openser' and 'openserrw' to access > mysql database? Also, my database is on a remote host so kamdbctl may > not be useful. Hi George, it seems this tool was not updated to the new version. Could you please open a bug report for this on our tracker [1]? I already started to compare the databases, and will update the upgrading documentation for this on our wiki. I'll send you a link to the docs when i finished it later. Cheers, Henning [1] https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=139143 ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Kamailio-Users] In-dialog request correlation without loose routing?
Alex Balashov schrieb: > BTW, I do think it would be a good idea for the dialog module to export > these functions directly into the script symbols so they can be called > that way. I do not like to do loose routing unnecessarily / when I have > no use for it. How does your setup work without loose_route? The proxy sees in-dialog requests only if you record_route. If you do record_route(), you have to use loose_route for correct routing. You can't have one without the other (except you do manual routing also for in-dialog requests) klaus ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Kamailio-Users] Client REGISTERED but "404-NOT FOUND"
Hi Iak and Victor, The problem is now solved, the Client appeared to be buggy and not my Kamailio config. Cheers, Lu. Message: 4 Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:26:24 +0200 From: " Victor Pascual ?vila " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Client REGISTERED but "404-NOT FOUND" during INVITE To: " I?aki Baz Castillo " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 10:48 AM, I?aki Baz Castillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/10/15 luzango mfupe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> >> Hi Mates, >> I am testing a Client in Nokia E65 using kamailio 1.3.3. I managed to >> successfull get it Registered but when i attempt to make a call i always get >> the "404 Not Found" message in the INVITE. Strangely enough, the Client >> appears to still be ONLINE in the location table. > > Your conclusion is wrong. A user doen't need to be registered in order > to make a PSTN call (except if you add that logic to your script, that > is not the case). > > So, forget yuor user is registered, it's doesn't matter, and debug why > your dialed number is not matched as a number to the PSTN. I?aki is right here. In addition, "404 Not Found" is not the correct reponse when the destination target is not registered, IMO it should be a 480 instead. -- Victor Pascual ?vila -- Message: 5 Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 18:23:19 +0200 From: " I?aki Baz Castillo " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Client REGISTERED but "404-NOT FOUND" during INVITE Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2008/10/16 Victor Pascual ?vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > In addition, "404 Not Found" is not the correct reponse when the > destination target is not registered, IMO it should be a 480 instead. Yeah!!! 404 should be returned when the proxy/UAS received a request and it's not responsible for it, for example a non existing user (non existing user != non registered user). When a user is not registered, but it does exist in the server, the server must reply "480". -- Luzango Mfupe TUUNE MOBILE Tel:0128440528/0123825710 Tshwane-RSA "...Ships are safe in harbor, but they were never meant to stay there..." -- Luzango Mfupe TUUNE MOBILE Tel:0128440528/0123825710 Tshwane-RSA "...Ships are safe in harbor, but they were never meant to stay there..." ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
