Re: [SR-Users] handle_ruri_alias() and multiple aliases

2021-06-02 Thread Denys Pozniak
Thank you! I will report on the results of the testing. вт, 1 июн. 2021 г. в 10:39, Daniel-Constantin Mierla : > Hello, > > I also agree that it should be fixed in signalling processing rules, the > proxy that is not next hop after NAT route should not add alias parameter. > > However, I also fa

Re: [SR-Users] handle_ruri_alias() and multiple aliases

2021-06-01 Thread Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Hello, I also agree that it should be fixed in signalling processing rules, the proxy that is not next hop after NAT route should not add alias parameter. However, I also faced similar multi-alias issues a few times in the past, when the proxy I controlled was the one that had to add the alias an

Re: [SR-Users] handle_ruri_alias() and multiple aliases

2021-05-31 Thread Alex Balashov
On 5/31/21 6:27 PM, Ovidiu Sas wrote: You can adjust your script to use aliases only when needed. We want clean and simple signalling. I strongly agree with Ovidiu. This is really the solution. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-f

Re: [SR-Users] handle_ruri_alias() and multiple aliases

2021-05-31 Thread Ovidiu Sas
You can adjust your script to use aliases only when needed. We want clean and simple signalling. -ovidiu On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 15:05 Denys Pozniak wrote: > Thanks, Alex and Ovidiu, > > Yes, I agree that *set_contact_alias ()* should only be used once. > The essence of the problem is that all

Re: [SR-Users] handle_ruri_alias() and multiple aliases

2021-05-31 Thread Denys Pozniak
Thanks, Alex and Ovidiu, Yes, I agree that *set_contact_alias ()* should only be used once. The essence of the problem is that all external connections are processed as for NAT by default in my script. Is there any reason for improving the *handle_ruri_alias ()* function so that we can specify th

Re: [SR-Users] handle_ruri_alias() and multiple aliases

2021-05-31 Thread Ovidiu Sas
If there are two proxies involved, only one should handle aliases (the one that is communicating directly with the endpoint). If a Contact has a private IP, but the request is coming from a proxy that is in charge of NAT, then the Contact should not be altered. When you route back in dialog request

Re: [SR-Users] handle_ruri_alias() and multiple aliases

2021-05-31 Thread Alex Balashov
I don’t think the handle_ruri_alias() concept was created to handle such complications. Usually you would not have two layers of NAT... — Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > On May 31, 2021, at 1:53 PM, Denys Pozniak wrote: > >  > Hello! > > I need help understandi

[SR-Users] handle_ruri_alias() and multiple aliases

2021-05-31 Thread Denys Pozniak
Hello! I need help understanding how the *handle_ruri_alias()* function works. *Call-flow:* Upstream operator -> Kamailio Proxy -> Edpoint. The upstream operator in the initial SIP INVITE in the Contact field sends us an alias parameter, in turn, our Kamailio Proxy adds its own too. The Contact a