subject:"Re\: \[OpenSIPS\-Users\] Problem with fix_nated

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

2022-05-03 Thread Bogdan-Andrei Iancu



Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
  https://www.opensips-solutions.com
OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
  https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/

On 5/3/22 12:04 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:

Hi Bogdan,
Thanks for clarification, I'll try to monitor this and analyze it further!

In regards to 'it simply replace the host:port part of the contact 
with the src IP and port from network level' for example if request is 
coming from 172.16.22.4:5060  and Contact is 
set to 'sip:172.167.22.4:5060 ', would 
fix_nated_contact() just replace Contact with the same values?

Yes, correct.

As it doesn't have any 'received' parameter to replace this Contact 
with? Thanks!
$avp(received) it is an output of the fix_nated_register() function, not 
an input.


On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 6:55 PM Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
mailto:bog...@opensips.org>> wrote:


See inline

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
   https://www.opensips-solutions.com  
OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
   https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/  


On 5/3/22 11:40 AM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:

Hi Bogdan,
Will fix_nated_register() overwrite results of a fix_nated_contact()?

no, use either one, either the other, but not both in the same
time - see the docs for the nathelper module for details.


Second question - for 'OPTIONS' where Contact is available -
should fix_nated_contact() replace it with the correct one?

yes, if you relay the OPTIONS

Where exactly does this function take the value to replace
Contact with - from '$avp(received)' param?

no, it is taken from the network level, the src IP and port.

So it won't do anything if, for example, OPTIONS packet comes
from my LAN Asterisk server and reaches the OpenSIPS LAN interface?

the fix_nated_xxxX() does not do any testing, it simply replace
the host:port part of the contact with the src IP and port from
network level.

Even though nat_uac_test(7) would confirm a RFC1918 private
address fix_nated_contact() can't do much in this case, is that
correct?

Thanks a lot for your help!

Best regards,
Yury.

On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 6:25 PM Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
mailto:bog...@opensips.org>> wrote:

Hi Yury,

For a REGISTER you should use the fix_nated_register() function.

Regards,

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
   https://www.opensips-solutions.com  

OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
   https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/  


On 5/2/22 8:07 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:

Hi Bogdan,
No, nothing in OpenSIPS logs, unfortunately.

Here's another log, I'm doing 'fix_nated_register' in this
case at the REGISTER route and doing 'fix_nated_contact()'
at the very beginning of my script, just for the testing
purpose.

May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Forwarding
REGISTER from sip:123...@domain.com:5060
, requested Expries: 60
to main registrar at sip:172.16.4.22:5060
 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY] [123456->123456] REGISTER 401
Unauthorized FROM 172.16.4.22:5060 
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Request from
1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001, domain domain.com 
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Forwarding
REGISTER from sip:123...@domain.com:5060
, requested Expries: 60
to main registrar at sip:172.16.4.22:5060
 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY] [123456->123456] REGISTER 200 OK
FROM 172.16.4.22:5060 
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGREPLY]  [123456->123456] Reply from
172.16.4.22:5060 , code is 200 -
OK, saving contact (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [EVENT] Inserting contact
sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001

(569f6c324981335e0b33daf8fc88ed77)
May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]       OPTIONS request from
172.16.4.22:5060  to
sip:123456@172.16.4.254:5060
, fu is
sip:123456@1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX
May  3 03:00:51

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

2022-05-03 Thread Yury Kirsanov

Hi Bogdan,
Thanks for clarification, I'll try to monitor this and analyze it further!

In regards to 'it simply replace the host:port part of the contact with the
src IP and port from network level' for example if request is coming from
172.16.22.4:5060 and Contact is set to 'sip:172.167.22.4:5060', would
fix_nated_contact() just replace Contact with the same values? As it
doesn't have any 'received' parameter to replace this Contact with? Thanks!

On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 6:55 PM Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
wrote:

> See inline
>
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>   https://www.opensips-solutions.com
> OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
>   https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/
>
> On 5/3/22 11:40 AM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:
>
> Hi Bogdan,
> Will fix_nated_register() overwrite results of a fix_nated_contact()?
>
> no, use either one, either the other, but not both in the same time - see
> the docs for the nathelper module for details.
>
>
> Second question - for 'OPTIONS' where Contact is available - should
> fix_nated_contact() replace it with the correct one?
>
> yes, if you relay the OPTIONS
>
> Where exactly does this function take the value to replace Contact with -
> from '$avp(received)' param?
>
> no, it is taken from the network level, the src IP and port.
>
> So it won't do anything if, for example, OPTIONS packet comes from my LAN
> Asterisk server and reaches the OpenSIPS LAN interface?
>
> the fix_nated_xxxX() does not do any testing, it simply replace the
> host:port part of the contact with the src IP and port from network level.
>
> Even though nat_uac_test(7) would confirm a RFC1918 private
> address fix_nated_contact() can't do much in this case, is that correct?
>
> Thanks a lot for your help!
>
> Best regards,
> Yury.
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 6:25 PM Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Yury,
>>
>> For a REGISTER you should use the fix_nated_register() function.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>
>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>   https://www.opensips-solutions.com
>> OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
>>   https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/
>>
>> On 5/2/22 8:07 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bogdan,
>> No, nothing in OpenSIPS logs, unfortunately.
>>
>> Here's another log, I'm doing 'fix_nated_register' in this case at the
>> REGISTER route and doing 'fix_nated_contact()' at the very beginning of my
>> script, just for the testing purpose.
>>
>> May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Forwarding REGISTER from
>> sip:123...@domain.com:5060, requested Expries: 60 to main registrar at
>> sip:172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
>> May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY] [123456->123456] REGISTER 401
>> Unauthorized FROM 172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
>> May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Request from
>> 1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001, domain domain.com
>> (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
>> May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Forwarding REGISTER from
>> sip:123...@domain.com:5060, requested Expries: 60 to main registrar at
>> sip:172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
>> May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY] [123456->123456] REGISTER 200 OK FROM
>> 172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
>> May  3 03:00:48 [REGREPLY]  [123456->123456] Reply from
>> 172.16.4.22:5060, code is 200 - OK, saving contact
>> (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
>> May  3 03:00:48 [EVENT] Inserting contact sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001
>> (569f6c324981335e0b33daf8fc88ed77)
>> May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]   OPTIONS request from 172.16.4.22:5060 to
>> sip:123456@172.16.4.254:5060, fu is sip:123456@1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX
>> May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]   [123456->123456] SIP device
>> sip:123456@172.16.4.254 found, relaying to sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001
>> (76f4319976c85e45b2ff916581912550)
>>
>> No errors in OpenSIPS logs. Here's output of 'opensips-cli -x mi fifo
>> ul_dump':
>>
>> "AORs": [
>> {
>> "AOR": "123456",
>> "Contacts": [
>> {
>> "Contact": "sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001",
>> "ContactID": "3713509073413807284",
>> "Expires": 47,
>> "Q": "",
>> "Callid": "6_3941098626",
>> "Cseq": 2,
>> "User-agent": "Yealink SIP-T46G 28.83.0.120",
>> "Received": "sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001",
>> "State": "CS_SYNC",
>> "Flags": 0,
>> "Cflags": "",
>> "Socket": "udp:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:5060",
>> "Methods": 16383
>> }
>> ]
>> }
>>
>> Thanks and best regards,
>> Yury.
>>

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

2022-05-03 Thread Bogdan-Andrei Iancu


See inline

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
  https://www.opensips-solutions.com
OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
  https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/

On 5/3/22 11:40 AM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:

Hi Bogdan,
Will fix_nated_register() overwrite results of a fix_nated_contact()?
no, use either one, either the other, but not both in the same time - 
see the docs for the nathelper module for details.


Second question - for 'OPTIONS' where Contact is available - should 
fix_nated_contact() replace it with the correct one?

yes, if you relay the OPTIONS
Where exactly does this function take the value to replace Contact 
with - from '$avp(received)' param?

no, it is taken from the network level, the src IP and port.
So it won't do anything if, for example, OPTIONS packet comes from my 
LAN Asterisk server and reaches the OpenSIPS LAN interface?
the fix_nated_xxxX() does not do any testing, it simply replace the 
host:port part of the contact with the src IP and port from network level.
Even though nat_uac_test(7) would confirm a RFC1918 private 
address fix_nated_contact() can't do much in this case, is that correct?


Thanks a lot for your help!

Best regards,
Yury.

On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 6:25 PM Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
mailto:bog...@opensips.org>> wrote:


Hi Yury,

For a REGISTER you should use the fix_nated_register() function.

Regards,

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
   https://www.opensips-solutions.com  
OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
   https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/  


On 5/2/22 8:07 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:

Hi Bogdan,
No, nothing in OpenSIPS logs, unfortunately.

Here's another log, I'm doing 'fix_nated_register' in this case
at the REGISTER route and doing 'fix_nated_contact()' at the very
beginning of my script, just for the testing purpose.

May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]      [123456->123456] Forwarding
REGISTER from sip:123...@domain.com:5060
, requested Expries: 60 to
main registrar at sip:172.16.4.22:5060 
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY]         [123456->123456] REGISTER 401
Unauthorized FROM 172.16.4.22:5060 
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]      [123456->123456] Request from
1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001, domain domain.com 
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]      [123456->123456] Forwarding
REGISTER from sip:123...@domain.com:5060
, requested Expries: 60 to
main registrar at sip:172.16.4.22:5060 
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY]         [123456->123456] REGISTER 200 OK
FROM 172.16.4.22:5060 
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGREPLY]      [123456->123456] Reply from
172.16.4.22:5060 , code is 200 - OK,
saving contact (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [EVENT] Inserting contact
sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001

(569f6c324981335e0b33daf8fc88ed77)
May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]       OPTIONS request from
172.16.4.22:5060  to
sip:123456@172.16.4.254:5060
, fu is
sip:123456@1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX
May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]       [123456->123456] SIP device
sip:123456@172.16.4.254  found,
relaying to sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001
(76f4319976c85e45b2ff916581912550)

No errors in OpenSIPS logs. Here's output of 'opensips-cli -x mi
fifo ul_dump':

            "AORs": [
                {
                    "AOR": "123456",
                    "Contacts": [
                        {
                            "Contact":
"sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001 ",
                            "ContactID": "3713509073413807284",
                            "Expires": 47,
                            "Q": "",
                            "Callid": "6_3941098626",
                            "Cseq": 2,
                            "User-agent": "Yealink SIP-T46G
28.83.0.120",
                            "Received": "sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001",
                            "State": "CS_SYNC",
                            "Flags": 0,
                            "Cflags": "",
                            "Socket": "udp:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:5060",
                            "Methods": 16383
                        }
                    ]
                }

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

2022-05-03 Thread Yury Kirsanov

Hi Bogdan,
Will fix_nated_register() overwrite results of a fix_nated_contact()?

Second question - for 'OPTIONS' where Contact is available - should
fix_nated_contact() replace it with the correct one? Where exactly does
this function take the value to replace Contact with - from
'$avp(received)' param? So it won't do anything if, for example, OPTIONS
packet comes from my LAN Asterisk server and reaches the OpenSIPS LAN
interface? Even though nat_uac_test(7) would confirm a RFC1918 private
address fix_nated_contact() can't do much in this case, is that correct?

Thanks a lot for your help!

Best regards,
Yury.

On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 6:25 PM Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
wrote:

> Hi Yury,
>
> For a REGISTER you should use the fix_nated_register() function.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>   https://www.opensips-solutions.com
> OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
>   https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/
>
> On 5/2/22 8:07 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:
>
> Hi Bogdan,
> No, nothing in OpenSIPS logs, unfortunately.
>
> Here's another log, I'm doing 'fix_nated_register' in this case at the
> REGISTER route and doing 'fix_nated_contact()' at the very beginning of my
> script, just for the testing purpose.
>
> May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Forwarding REGISTER from
> sip:123...@domain.com:5060, requested Expries: 60 to main registrar at
> sip:172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
> May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY] [123456->123456] REGISTER 401 Unauthorized
> FROM 172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
> May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Request from
> 1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001, domain domain.com (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
> May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Forwarding REGISTER from
> sip:123...@domain.com:5060, requested Expries: 60 to main registrar at
> sip:172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
> May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY] [123456->123456] REGISTER 200 OK FROM
> 172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
> May  3 03:00:48 [REGREPLY]  [123456->123456] Reply from
> 172.16.4.22:5060, code is 200 - OK, saving contact
> (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
> May  3 03:00:48 [EVENT] Inserting contact sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001
> (569f6c324981335e0b33daf8fc88ed77)
> May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]   OPTIONS request from 172.16.4.22:5060 to
> sip:123456@172.16.4.254:5060, fu is sip:123456@1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX
> May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]   [123456->123456] SIP device
> sip:123456@172.16.4.254 found, relaying to sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001
> (76f4319976c85e45b2ff916581912550)
>
> No errors in OpenSIPS logs. Here's output of 'opensips-cli -x mi fifo
> ul_dump':
>
> "AORs": [
> {
> "AOR": "123456",
> "Contacts": [
> {
> "Contact": "sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001",
> "ContactID": "3713509073413807284",
> "Expires": 47,
> "Q": "",
> "Callid": "6_3941098626",
> "Cseq": 2,
> "User-agent": "Yealink SIP-T46G 28.83.0.120",
> "Received": "sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001",
> "State": "CS_SYNC",
> "Flags": 0,
> "Cflags": "",
> "Socket": "udp:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:5060",
> "Methods": 16383
> }
> ]
> }
>
> Thanks and best regards,
> Yury.
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 12:29 AM Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Are there any errors when the "fixing" is done? The presence of a param
>> should not impact here.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bogdan
>>
>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>
>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>   https://www.opensips-solutions.com
>> OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
>>   https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/
>>
>> On 4/29/22 1:43 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> I'm using OpenSIPS 3.2.4 and recently run into following issue:
>>
>> Imagine simplest proxy setup - OpenSIPS just accepts new packet, for
>> example INVITE, changes destination using 'sethostport()' and then
>> issues 't_relay()' to forward the packet. Let's ignore replies and so on.
>>
>> If I'm doing a 'fix_nated_contact()' before sending this packet I'm
>> expecting Contact: field to be replaced with a source IP:port as per
>> manual. And this works if the Contact is in simple form like '
>> sip:777@192.168.29.106:65033'.
>>
>> But if following Contact comes in OpenSIPS doesn't change it leaving
>> private IP in the contact:
>>
>> 'Contact: sip:777@192.168.29.106:65033;rinstance=2f59b175103f1088'
>>
>> Can you please let me know why is that happening? Thanks!
>>
>> Best

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

2022-05-03 Thread Bogdan-Andrei Iancu


Hi Yury,

For a REGISTER you should use the fix_nated_register() function.

Regards,

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
  https://www.opensips-solutions.com
OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
  https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/

On 5/2/22 8:07 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:

Hi Bogdan,
No, nothing in OpenSIPS logs, unfortunately.

Here's another log, I'm doing 'fix_nated_register' in this case at the 
REGISTER route and doing 'fix_nated_contact()' at the very 
beginning of my script, just for the testing purpose.


May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]      [123456->123456] Forwarding REGISTER 
from sip:123...@domain.com:5060 , 
requested Expries: 60 to main registrar at sip:172.16.4.22:5060 
 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY]         [123456->123456] REGISTER 401 
Unauthorized FROM 172.16.4.22:5060  
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]      [123456->123456] Request from 
1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001, domain domain.com  
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]      [123456->123456] Forwarding REGISTER 
from sip:123...@domain.com:5060 , 
requested Expries: 60 to main registrar at sip:172.16.4.22:5060 
 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY]         [123456->123456] REGISTER 200 OK FROM 
172.16.4.22:5060  
(84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGREPLY]      [123456->123456] Reply from 
172.16.4.22:5060 , code is 200 - OK, saving 
contact (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [EVENT] Inserting contact sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001 
 (569f6c324981335e0b33daf8fc88ed77)
May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]       OPTIONS request from 172.16.4.22:5060 
 to sip:123456@172.16.4.254:5060 
, fu is sip:123456@1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX
May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]       [123456->123456] SIP device 
sip:123456@172.16.4.254  found, 
relaying to sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001 (76f4319976c85e45b2ff916581912550)


No errors in OpenSIPS logs. Here's output of 'opensips-cli -x mi fifo 
ul_dump':


            "AORs": [
                {
                    "AOR": "123456",
                    "Contacts": [
                        {
                            "Contact": "sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001 
",

                            "ContactID": "3713509073413807284",
                            "Expires": 47,
                            "Q": "",
                            "Callid": "6_3941098626",
                            "Cseq": 2,
                            "User-agent": "Yealink SIP-T46G 28.83.0.120",
                            "Received": "sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001",
                            "State": "CS_SYNC",
                            "Flags": 0,
                            "Cflags": "",
                            "Socket": "udp:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:5060",
                            "Methods": 16383
                        }
                    ]
                }

Thanks and best regards,
Yury.

On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 12:29 AM Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
mailto:bog...@opensips.org>> wrote:


Hi,

Are there any errors when the "fixing" is done? The presence of a
param should not impact here.

Regards,
Bogdan

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
   https://www.opensips-solutions.com  
OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
   https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/  


On 4/29/22 1:43 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:

Hi,
I'm using OpenSIPS 3.2.4 and recently run into following issue:

Imagine simplest proxy setup - OpenSIPS just accepts new packet,
for example INVITE, changes destination using 'sethostport()'
and then issues 't_relay()' to forward the packet. Let's ignore
replies and so on.

If I'm doing a 'fix_nated_contact()' before sending this packet
I'm expecting Contact: field to be replaced with a source IP:port
as per manual. And this works if the Contact is in simple form
like 'sip:777@192.168.29.106:65033
'.

But if following Contact comes in OpenSIPS doesn't change it
leaving private IP in the contact:

'Contact:
sip:777@192.168.29.106:65033;rinstance=2f59b175103f1088'

Can you please let me know why is that happening? Thanks!

Best regards,
Yury.

___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

2022-05-02 Thread Yury Kirsanov

Hi Bogdan,
No, nothing in OpenSIPS logs, unfortunately.

Here's another log, I'm doing 'fix_nated_register' in this case at the
REGISTER route and doing 'fix_nated_contact()' at the very beginning of my
script, just for the testing purpose.

May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Forwarding REGISTER from
sip:123...@domain.com:5060, requested Expries: 60 to main registrar at sip:
172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY] [123456->123456] REGISTER 401 Unauthorized
FROM 172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Request from
1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001, domain domain.com (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGISTER]  [123456->123456] Forwarding REGISTER from
sip:123...@domain.com:5060, requested Expries: 60 to main registrar at sip:
172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REPLY] [123456->123456] REGISTER 200 OK FROM
172.16.4.22:5060 (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [REGREPLY]  [123456->123456] Reply from 172.16.4.22:5060,
code is 200 - OK, saving contact (84327f479c5d50e1634422f72a0b7619)
May  3 03:00:48 [EVENT] Inserting contact sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001
(569f6c324981335e0b33daf8fc88ed77)
May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]   OPTIONS request from 172.16.4.22:5060 to
sip:123456@172.16.4.254:5060, fu is sip:123456@1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX
May  3 03:00:51 [OPTIONS]   [123456->123456] SIP device
sip:123456@172.16.4.254 found, relaying to sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001
(76f4319976c85e45b2ff916581912550)

No errors in OpenSIPS logs. Here's output of 'opensips-cli -x mi fifo
ul_dump':

"AORs": [
{
"AOR": "123456",
"Contacts": [
{
"Contact": "sip:123456@192.168.1.36:8001",
"ContactID": "3713509073413807284",
"Expires": 47,
"Q": "",
"Callid": "6_3941098626",
"Cseq": 2,
"User-agent": "Yealink SIP-T46G 28.83.0.120",
"Received": "sip:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:8001",
"State": "CS_SYNC",
"Flags": 0,
"Cflags": "",
"Socket": "udp:1XX.1XX.1XX.1XX:5060",
"Methods": 16383
}
]
}

Thanks and best regards,
Yury.

On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 12:29 AM Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Are there any errors when the "fixing" is done? The presence of a param
> should not impact here.
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
>
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>   https://www.opensips-solutions.com
> OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
>   https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/
>
> On 4/29/22 1:43 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I'm using OpenSIPS 3.2.4 and recently run into following issue:
>
> Imagine simplest proxy setup - OpenSIPS just accepts new packet, for
> example INVITE, changes destination using 'sethostport()' and then
> issues 't_relay()' to forward the packet. Let's ignore replies and so on.
>
> If I'm doing a 'fix_nated_contact()' before sending this packet I'm
> expecting Contact: field to be replaced with a source IP:port as per
> manual. And this works if the Contact is in simple form like '
> sip:777@192.168.29.106:65033'.
>
> But if following Contact comes in OpenSIPS doesn't change it leaving
> private IP in the contact:
>
> 'Contact: sip:777@192.168.29.106:65033;rinstance=2f59b175103f1088'
>
> Can you please let me know why is that happening? Thanks!
>
> Best regards,
> Yury.
>
> ___
> Users mailing 
> listUsers@lists.opensips.orghttp://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] Problem with fix_nated_contact

2022-05-02 Thread Bogdan-Andrei Iancu


Hi,

Are there any errors when the "fixing" is done? The presence of a param 
should not impact here.


Regards,
Bogdan

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
  https://www.opensips-solutions.com
OpenSIPS eBootcamp 23rd May - 3rd June 2022
  https://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_eBootcamp_2022/

On 4/29/22 1:43 PM, Yury Kirsanov wrote:

Hi,
I'm using OpenSIPS 3.2.4 and recently run into following issue:

Imagine simplest proxy setup - OpenSIPS just accepts new packet, for 
example INVITE, changes destination using 'sethostport()' and then 
issues 't_relay()' to forward the packet. Let's ignore replies and so on.


If I'm doing a 'fix_nated_contact()' before sending this packet I'm 
expecting Contact: field to be replaced with a source IP:port as per 
manual. And this works if the Contact is in simple form like 
'sip:777@192.168.29.106:65033 
'.


But if following Contact comes in OpenSIPS doesn't change it leaving 
private IP in the contact:


'Contact: sip:777@192.168.29.106:65033;rinstance=2f59b175103f1088'

Can you please let me know why is that happening? Thanks!

Best regards,
Yury.

___
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] Problem with fix_nated_contact

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Problem with fix_nated_contact

7 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information