Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] B2BUA module question

2009-08-25 Thread Alex Balashov
Brett Nemeroff wrote:

 Question about the direction of the B2BUA module. I know one of the key 
 feature is topology hiding. Does this also occur in the SDP? I would 
 expect that it would need to still be paired with something like 
 mediaproxy or rtpproxy to achieve topology hiding with SDP as well, is 
 this correct? 

Yes.

-- 
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems
Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct  : (+1) (678) 954-0671

___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] B2BUA module question

2009-08-25 Thread Anca Vamanu
Hi Brett,


Brett Nemeroff wrote:
 All,
 Question about the direction of the B2BUA module. I know one of the 
 key feature is topology hiding. Does this also occur in the SDP? I 
 would expect that it would need to still be paired with something like 
 mediaproxy or rtpproxy to achieve topology hiding with SDP as well, is 
 this correct? Do you expect the B2BUA module will ever integrate into 
 any of the media proxying solutions?

As you correctly assumed, the B2BUA implementation in OpenSIPS is only a 
signaling B2BUA and it does not deal with sdp. The media will still go 
end to end and you need to use something like rtpproxy for a full b2b.
 Also, what's the possibility of doing things like changing headers, 
 removing headers and such. For example, internally, I may have an 
 X-Account-Number: field that is used between servers and I never 
 want an request from the outside to ever come in with one of those and 
 likewise I don't ever want a request to go out with one of those. I 
 know a lot of that can be done in the script already, but I'm 
 wondering if the B2BUA portions have any special handling for that 
 kind of thing (ie: remove all non-standard headers).  Also, there are 
 a lot of non-rfc-ish things that I have to do on a regular basis that 
 a B2BUA always performs better. For example, I have partners that 
 insist on specific formatting of the From or To headers (like adding 
 or removing prefixes to from/to headers.. yes.. I know..). 

The headers that are now taken from the initial message and inserted in 
the message sent on the other side are: Supported, Require, 
Proxy-Require, Accept and Content-Type.
We can extend the rules action part to include this one of requesting a 
certain header to be added since it can indeed be useful.
But the one with formatting the to or from header in a certain way is 
quite hard to express as a rule..

regards,
Anca
 Thanks!
 -Brett

 

 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@lists.opensips.org
 http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
   


___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] B2BUA module question

2009-08-25 Thread Brett Nemeroff
Anca,What I was imaging was something like the dialplan module to perform
the rewrite, and the B2BUA module to track was it was originally so the
reverse direction doesn't include the translation. That kind of thing.

inside - b2bua + translation --- outside see's translated TO URI

outside with translated TOURI -b2bua - inside see's restored TO URI
(original TO URI)

Forgive me for not entirely understanding the B2BUA scenarios and rules
quite yet. ;)

-Brett

On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Anca Vamanu a...@opensips.org wrote:

 Hi Brett,


 Brett Nemeroff wrote:
  All,
  Question about the direction of the B2BUA module. I know one of the
  key feature is topology hiding. Does this also occur in the SDP? I
  would expect that it would need to still be paired with something like
  mediaproxy or rtpproxy to achieve topology hiding with SDP as well, is
  this correct? Do you expect the B2BUA module will ever integrate into
  any of the media proxying solutions?
 
 As you correctly assumed, the B2BUA implementation in OpenSIPS is only a
 signaling B2BUA and it does not deal with sdp. The media will still go
 end to end and you need to use something like rtpproxy for a full b2b.
  Also, what's the possibility of doing things like changing headers,
  removing headers and such. For example, internally, I may have an
  X-Account-Number: field that is used between servers and I never
  want an request from the outside to ever come in with one of those and
  likewise I don't ever want a request to go out with one of those. I
  know a lot of that can be done in the script already, but I'm
  wondering if the B2BUA portions have any special handling for that
  kind of thing (ie: remove all non-standard headers).  Also, there are
  a lot of non-rfc-ish things that I have to do on a regular basis that
  a B2BUA always performs better. For example, I have partners that
  insist on specific formatting of the From or To headers (like adding
  or removing prefixes to from/to headers.. yes.. I know..).
 
 The headers that are now taken from the initial message and inserted in
 the message sent on the other side are: Supported, Require,
 Proxy-Require, Accept and Content-Type.
 We can extend the rules action part to include this one of requesting a
 certain header to be added since it can indeed be useful.
 But the one with formatting the to or from header in a certain way is
 quite hard to express as a rule..

 regards,
 Anca
  Thanks!
  -Brett
 
  
 
  ___
  Users mailing list
  Users@lists.opensips.org
  http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
 


 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@lists.opensips.org
 http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] B2BUA module question

2009-08-25 Thread Saúl Ibarra
 The headers that are now taken from the initial message and inserted in
 the message sent on the other side are: Supported, Require,
 Proxy-Require, Accept and Content-Type.
 We can extend the rules action part to include this one of requesting a
 certain header to be added since it can indeed be useful.

I'd be really happy to see this, as I stated on the dev list. It would
be nice if we had a configuration parameter so that all custom headers
are passed to the other leg, so OpenSIPS could act as a transparent
b2bua :)


-- 
/Saúl
http://www.saghul.net | http://www.sipdoc.net

___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users