Hi Alex,
On 7 February 2018 at 18:05, Alex Balashov
wrote:
>
> (1) Most of the endpoints in question are NAT'd, and I was using
> fix_nated_register() and the "received AVP" for mitigation.
>
> Although the "Received" address is replicated by DMQ, using Path to
> discover the adjacent "last hop"
Hi Charles,
A few other questions arise, mostly as a matter of best practices rather
than functional possibility:
(1) Most of the endpoints in question are NAT'd, and I was using
fix_nated_register() and the "received AVP" for mitigation.
Although the "Received" address is replicated by DMQ, us
Hi Alex,
Thanks for the update - glad you solved it.
Cheers,
Charles
On Mon, 5 Feb 2018 at 14:41, Alex Balashov
wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> By way of further update:
>
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 07:06:41PM +, Charles Chance wrote:
>
> > > > modparam("registrar", "path_mode", 0)
> > > > modpar
Hi Charles,
By way of further update:
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 07:06:41PM +, Charles Chance wrote:
> > > modparam("registrar", "path_mode", 0)
> > > modparam("registrar", "path_use_received", 1)
> > > modparam("registrar", "path_check_local", 1)
> >
> > I have the latter set, but left the for
On 1 February 2018 at 19:02, Alex Balashov
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 06:57:03PM +, Charles Chance wrote:
>
> > Just to confirm, do you have use_path set?
> >
> > modparam("registrar", "use_path", 1)
>
> I do indeed.
>
> > modparam("registrar", "path_mode", 0)
> > modparam("registrar",
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 06:57:03PM +, Charles Chance wrote:
> Just to confirm, do you have use_path set?
>
> modparam("registrar", "use_path", 1)
I do indeed.
> modparam("registrar", "path_mode", 0)
> modparam("registrar", "path_use_received", 1)
> modparam("registrar", "path_check_local",
Hi Alex,
Just to confirm, do you have use_path set?
modparam("registrar", "use_path", 1)
For your setup I'd also recommend setting:
modparam("registrar", "path_mode", 0)
modparam("registrar", "path_use_received", 1)
modparam("registrar", "path_check_local", 1)
Cheers,
Charles
On 1 February
Hi Charles,
ul.dump reflects that Path is not being applied to the local contact, so
it should come as no surprise that it's not being replicated either.
I added this:
append_hf("Path: \r\n");
msg_apply_changes();
if(!save("location")) {
...
}
Hi Alex,
i have a setup, where I do a similar thing (except that the
Path-Header is added by another Proxy in front of Kamailio). I can
confirm, that "dmq_usrloc" replicates the Path as well on Kamailio
5.0.5:
U 2018/02/01 09:56:44.779300 37.120.180.58:5060 -> 37.120.181.229:5060
KDMQ sip:usrloc@
Hi Alex,
Socket is never replicated but path definitely should be.
Without DMQ involved and simply saving locally (with path header added
first) can you show me the output of ul.dump?
Cheers,
Charles
On Thu, 1 Feb 2018 at 08:31, Alex Balashov
wrote:
> Ah, thank you for that! I had tried call
Ah, thank you for that! I had tried calling msg_apply_changes() after
using add_path(), but didn't realise that it's dependent on relay rather
than just adding it to the existing message lumps. However, to your
point, the documentation does say that the "outgoing" interface address
is populated by
Hi Alex,
You’ll need to call msg_apply_changes before saving. Also, as I recall,
add_path will only work if relaying so you’ll need to add the header
manually. Something like this:
...
append_hf("Path:\r\n");
msg_apply_changes();
...
Let me know if it works for you.
Cheers,
Charles
On Thu,
Unfortunately, no luck with 5.1 either.
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 02:49:32AM -0500, Alex Balashov wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> It does not appear that Path is being replicated, either.
>
> I am running add_path() prior to save()ing to usrloc, but on both hosts,
> I see:
>
> # kamcmd -s /tmp/kamaili
Hi Charles,
It does not appear that Path is being replicated, either.
I am running add_path() prior to save()ing to usrloc, but on both hosts,
I see:
# kamcmd -s /tmp/kamailio_ctl ul.dump | grep -i path
Path: [not set]
Hi Alex
On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 at 05:35, Alex Balashov
wrote:
>
> I hadn't even thought of Path; I do see that it's replicated. However,
> what are the consequences of adding a Path to a locally bound
> registration that is also replicated? I would assume that would cause
> outbound requests to the
Hi Charles,
Thank you kindly for your response:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 04:53:09AM +, Charles Chance wrote:
> Which version are you running? There were a few related patches recently -
> the one you mentioned will correctly set the server_id, although on its own
> will probably not help in t
Hi Alex,
Which version are you running? There were a few related patches recently -
the one you mentioned will correctly set the server_id, although on its own
will probably not help in the correct routing of requests. For that, I
would normally make use of Path.
The socket should indeed be set f
Ah, I guess this is the very problem that this relatively bleeding-edge
patch by Charles is meant to solve:
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/684059ca5bb76e2006a9560ac1efa8c3540d3a58#diff-511a71ab6e3db75071b6a440618be1df
-- Alex
--
Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
Tel
Also, it appears that under the DMQ regime, the socket parameter is not
set for locally received registrations either?
# kamcmd -s /tmp/kamailio_ctl ul.dump | grep Socket
Socket: [not set]
Socket: [not set]
Hi,
The Socket parameter of location entries is not replicated under
dmq_usrloc.
To make matters worse, the technical characteristics of the registrar
module are such that I cannot straightforwardly modify the incoming
Contact to add a rider indicating the server on which the register was
receiv
20 matches
Mail list logo
