[SR-Users] multidomain: running multiple kamailio on one host

2010-11-05 Thread MÉSZÁROS Mihály
Hello all! Is there any known problem to run multiple kamailio/sip-router instance in one host. I need this to handle multidomain situation. The multidomain what is built in is not satisfactory, because the UA-s what are from varying vendors. And some has strange or a very limited SIP imple

Re: [SR-Users] multidomain: running multiple kamailio on one host

2010-11-05 Thread Manwe
El Fri, 05 Nov 2010 09:10:15 +0100 MÉSZÁROS Mihály escribió: > Hello all! > > Is there any known problem to run multiple kamailio/sip-router instance > in one host. No problem at all. ___ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users

Re: [SR-Users] multidomain: running multiple kamailio on one host

2010-11-05 Thread Jiri Kuthan
You can also serve multiple domain with a single instance. -jiri On 11/5/10 9:15 AM, Jon Bonilla (Manwe) wrote: El Fri, 05 Nov 2010 09:10:15 +0100 MÉSZÁROS Mihály escribió: Hello all! Is there any known problem to run multiple kamailio/sip-router instance in one host. No problem at all.

Re: [SR-Users] multidomain: running multiple kamailio on one host

2010-11-05 Thread Klaus Darilion
Am 05.11.2010 09:10, schrieb MÉSZÁROS Mihály: Hello all! Is there any known problem to run multiple kamailio/sip-router instance in one host. No. Just start kamailio several times and provide a different config file for each: kamilio -f /etc/kamailio/kamailio-foobar.cfg kamilio -f /etc/ka

Re: [SR-Users] multidomain: running multiple kamailio on one host

2010-11-05 Thread Alex Balashov
On 11/05/2010 04:10 AM, MÉSZÁROS Mihály wrote: Hello all! Is there any known problem to run multiple kamailio/sip-router instance in one host. I need this to handle multidomain situation. The multidomain what is built in is not satisfactory, because the UA-s what are from varying vendors. And s

Re: [SR-Users] Siremis 2.0: error in LCR table editing??

2010-11-05 Thread Elena-Ramona Modroiu
Hi, thanks for reporting. It will be fixed soon. Regards, Ramona On 11/04/2010 02:16 PM, Klaus Feichtinger wrote: Hello list, has anybody else tried using SIREMIS 2.0 for administrating LCR tables in kamailio 3.1.0? I am not happy with the form / input boxes that are presented in the web bro

Re: [SR-Users] installing dispatcher module

2010-11-05 Thread Daniel-Constantin Mierla
do not send private emails. Keep the mailing list cc-ed. Thanks, Daniel On 11/5/10 1:41 PM, Rizwan Qureshi wrote: Thanks. Problem solved anyway. On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla mailto:mico...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hello, run kamailio with -c parameter to get

Re: [SR-Users] Terminated call processing Status: 487

2010-11-05 Thread JR Richardson
>> I'm seeing random errors in my Kamailio 3.0.2 log: >> >> ERROR: tm [tm.c:1300]: ERROR: w_t_relay_to: t_relay_to failed >> ERROR: tm [t_fwd.c:1379]: ERROR: t_forward_nonack: no branches for forwarding > > Are you sure those are the only errors in the log? > > I've gotten that before when getting

Re: [SR-Users] Terminated call processing Status: 487

2010-11-05 Thread Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Hello, the problem is in failure route where you don't filter out canceled transaction and try to re-route even the caller canceled the call. Add at the top of your failure route: if (t_is_canceled()) { exit; } Cheers, Daniel On 11/5/10 4:48 PM, JR Richardson wrote: I'm see

Re: [SR-Users] multidomain: running multiple kamailio on one host

2010-11-05 Thread MÉSZÁROS Mihály
2010-11-05 09:31 keltezéssel, Alex Balashov írta: On 11/05/2010 04:10 AM, MÉSZÁROS Mihály wrote: Hello all! Is there any known problem to run multiple kamailio/sip-router instance in one host. I need this to handle multidomain situation. The multidomain what is built in is not satisfactory, be

Re: [SR-Users] Terminated call processing Status: 487

2010-11-05 Thread JR Richardson
That fixed it, thanks Daniel, I can't beleive I missed that, it is in the example config too. I guess I need to RTM a bit more. Have a great weekend. JR On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > Hello, > > the problem is in failure route where you don't filter out can