Hi All,
I would like to use CDRTool for accounting and integrate with kamailio +
mediaproxy + freeradius.
so, please let me know about configuration or installation steps for
CDRToolon centos-5.X os.
I have followed this link for CDRTool configuration http://cdrtool
.ag-projects.com/wiki/Install
RAJNIKANT VANZA writes:
> I have followed this link for CDRTool configuration http://cdrtool
> .ag-projects.com/wiki/Install
> but not success and confused.
try to find out if there is a mailing list for CDRTool. this is not
it.
-- juha
___
SI
Hello,
thanks, so the Contact header is missing, that makes the 200ok invalid
for invitate - afaik contact is mandatory. Anyhow, crash should not
happen, but I wonder what happens with such call, practically the caller
does not know where to send the BYE. Or maybe 18x reply has contact hdr
an
Hello,
thanks, so the Contact header is missing, that makes the 200ok invalid
for invitate - afaik contact is mandatory. Anyhow, crash should not
happen, but I wonder what happens with such call, practically the caller
does not know where to send the BYE. Or maybe 18x reply has contact hdr
an
On 04/22/2010 10:01 AM, Stefan Sayer wrote:
]
clean? I am not so sure any more, trying to hack something together to
see where this gets. Is there a clean and simple method to do re-invite
from the b2bua, which catches all the possibilities (changed session etc)?
e.g., one possibility, reinvite
Hi Rajnikant,
you may also have a look at Siremis web management interface for
Kamailio, a light-weight application that you can use for accounting
purposes too.
http://siremis.asipto.com/install-accounting/
For a quick look at Siremis, here you can get a demo with
username=admin, password=a
On 04/23/2010 05:18 AM, Raphael Coeffic wrote:
On 23.04.10 09:51, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/22/2010 10:01 AM, Stefan Sayer wrote:
]
clean? I am not so sure any more, trying to hack something together to
see where this gets. Is there a clean and simple method to do re-invite
from the b2bua, whi
On 04/23/2010 06:14 AM, Raphael Coeffic wrote:
On 23.04.10 11:58, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/23/2010 05:18 AM, Raphael Coeffic wrote:
On 23.04.10 09:51, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/22/2010 10:01 AM, Stefan Sayer wrote:
]
clean? I am not so sure any more, trying to hack something together to
se
On 04/23/2010 07:42 AM, Raphael Coeffic wrote:
Ok, so even the standard 60 minutes "expire" would be an improvement ;-)
Oh yes.
--
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
1170 Peachtree Street
12th Floor, Suite 1200
Atlanta, GA 30309
Tel: +1-678-954-0670
Fax: +1-404-961-1892
Web: http:
Hi, I must deal with a B2BUA which keeps the original SDP unchanged
except the fact that it removes the "a=nortpproxy:yes" line added by
RtpProxy.
The B2BUA intercommunicates two Kamailio, both forcing its own RtpProxy server.
I've not tested it again but expect there will be no RTP as each
RtpPro
Hola Iñaki,
> Hi, I must deal with a B2BUA which keeps the original SDP unchanged
> except the fact that it removes the "a=nortpproxy:yes" line added by
> RtpProxy.
> The B2BUA intercommunicates two Kamailio, both forcing its own RtpProxy
> server.
>
> I've not tested it again but expect there
You can try use the flags r and f for this case.
These flags can force rtpproxy "to send" a RTP.
You can see:
http://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/1.5.x/nathelper.html#id2468157
--- Em sex, 23/4/10, Iñaki Baz Castillo escreveu:
De: Iñaki Baz Castillo
Assunto: [SR-Users] B2BUA removing a=no
Hi everyone,
In the page where a module is described, there is a list of dependencies that
have to be met in order to use the module, the list of exported parameters that
might need to be set in the configuration file and a list of exported functions
which can be used in the configuration scrip
On 23.04.10 09:51, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/22/2010 10:01 AM, Stefan Sayer wrote:
]
clean? I am not so sure any more, trying to hack something together to
see where this gets. Is there a clean and simple method to do re-invite
from the b2bua, which catches all the possibilities (changed sessio
On 23.04.10 11:58, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/23/2010 05:18 AM, Raphael Coeffic wrote:
On 23.04.10 09:51, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/22/2010 10:01 AM, Stefan Sayer wrote:
]
clean? I am not so sure any more, trying to hack something together to
see where this gets. Is there a clean and simple m
On 23.04.10 12:50, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/23/2010 06:14 AM, Raphael Coeffic wrote:
On 23.04.10 11:58, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/23/2010 05:18 AM, Raphael Coeffic wrote:
On 23.04.10 09:51, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/22/2010 10:01 AM, Stefan Sayer wrote:
]
clean? I am not so sure any more,
Alex-
> On 04/23/2010 06:14 AM, Raphael Coeffic wrote:
> > On 23.04.10 11:58, Alex Balashov wrote:
> >> On 04/23/2010 05:18 AM, Raphael Coeffic wrote:
> >>> On 23.04.10 09:51, Alex Balashov wrote:
> On 04/22/2010 10:01 AM, Stefan Sayer wrote:
> ]
> > clean? I am not so sure any more,
Iñaki Baz Castillo writes:
> I've not tested it again but expect there will be no RTP as each
> RtpProxy will wait for RTP coming from the other. Am I right?
hopefully you are not right. it must be possible to have a chain of
rtproxys for the same session. mediaproxy works ok in this kind of
On 04/23/2010 08:10 AM, Jeff Brower wrote:
But... is it being considered to add functionality to rtpproxy so it can send
something asynchronously to Kamailio which either sends BYEs or does something
to
cause the endpoints to do so? Currently, as far as I know, rtpproxy only
responds to
comma
Alex-
> > But... is it being considered to add functionality to rtpproxy so it can
> > send
> > something asynchronously to Kamailio which either sends BYEs or does
> > something to
> > cause the endpoints to do so? Currently, as far as I know, rtpproxy only
> > responds to
> > commands from n
Hi List,
I'm writing a little message because I encountered today a strange error
on my Kamailio 3.0 proxy/presence server ( and can't ask on IRC there's
nobody atm ;p )
I get these errors in the logs since a few hours:
Apr 23 14:31:41 proxy-b /proxy/bin/kamailio/sbin/kamailio[29008]: ERROR:
Hello,
On 4/23/10 2:44 PM, Tristan Mahé wrote:
Hi List,
I'm writing a little message because I encountered today a strange
error on my Kamailio 3.0 proxy/presence server ( and can't ask on IRC
there's nobody atm ;p )
I get these errors in the logs since a few hours:
Apr 23 14:31:41 proxy-b
2010/4/23 Jesus Rodriguez :
> Hola Iñaki,
>
>
>> Hi, I must deal with a B2BUA which keeps the original SDP unchanged
>> except the fact that it removes the "a=nortpproxy:yes" line added by
>> RtpProxy.
>> The B2BUA intercommunicates two Kamailio, both forcing its own RtpProxy
>> server.
>>
>> I've
Hello,
On 4/23/10 2:03 PM, hector.or...@swisscom.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
In the page where a module is described, there is a list of
dependencies that have to be met in order to use the module, the list
of exported parameters that might need to be set in the configuration
file and a list of
2010/4/23 Daniel Cardoso Alves
>
> You can try use the flags r and f for this case.
>
> These flags can force rtpproxy "to send" a RTP.
Hi, "-f" is not useful for me as the "boggus" B2BUA already does the
job of removing the line "a=nortpproxy:yes".
"-r" flag could be interesting. If I'm not wro
2010/4/23 Juha Heinanen :
> Iñaki Baz Castillo writes:
>
>> I've not tested it again but expect there will be no RTP as each
> > RtpProxy will wait for RTP coming from the other. Am I right?
>
> hopefully you are not right. it must be possible to have a chain of
> rtproxys for the same session.
Am 23.04.2010 13:32, schrieb Juha Heinanen:
Iñaki Baz Castillo writes:
I've not tested it again but expect there will be no RTP as each
> RtpProxy will wait for RTP coming from the other. Am I right?
hopefully you are not right. it must be possible to have a chain of
rtproxys for th
2010/4/23 Klaus Darilion :
> It works as long either:
> - rtpproxy uses the same IP address as the SIP proxy (rtpproxy per default
> allows incoming RTP packets (latching) only from the IP from which the SIP
> message was received), or
>
> - call rtpproxy with 'r' flag for the messages received fr
Hi,
in r1821 you can find my first shot at this scenario, a b2bua which
enables SST on both sides, and does the SDP ping pong as below.
I am sure that there are many cases which are not handled properly,
for example, if we have started one INVITE ping-pong from the B2B,
then we should not ac
2010/4/23 Klaus Darilion :
>
>
> Am 23.04.2010 13:32, schrieb Juha Heinanen:
>>
>> Iñaki Baz Castillo writes:
>>
>>> I've not tested it again but expect there will be no RTP as each
>>
>> > RtpProxy will wait for RTP coming from the other. Am I right?
>>
>> hopefully you are not right. it must
2010/4/24 Iñaki Baz Castillo :
> So let's suppose Kamailio-1 (1.1.1.1) using RtpProxy-1 (9.9.9.1) and
> Kamailio-2 (2.2.2.2) using RtpProxy-2 (9.9.9.2), and also a
> transparent SIP proxy between them (Proxy-X with IP 5.5.5.5).
>
> - Kamailio-1 receives an INVITE from a client and forces RtpProxy-1
2010/4/24 Iñaki Baz Castillo :
> I could do a test with the same scenario and unfortunatelly I miss
> something as it doesn't work:
>
> RtpProxy-2 doesn't receive RTP, neither from 5.5.5.5 or 9.9.9.1:PORT,
> so after some time it decides to send the RTP to 5.5.5.5:PORT !! (the
> pre-filled caller's
32 matches
Mail list logo
