2011/6/10 Daniel-Constantin Mierla :
>> Specifically, the RFC says:
>>
>> "During composition, a presence agent (PA) may encounter a stored
>> element that covers the present time. The PA MAY either
>> discard that element or MAY
>> convert it to a regular element if it considers that
>> info
2011/6/10 Daniel-Constantin Mierla :
> have you spotted in SIP/SIMPLE specs what has to be sent when the presentity
> is offline? My quick google was not that succesful. Maybe Inaki has the
> specs more fresh indexed in memory and can help.
If the user has not published a "offline" presentity, the
2011/6/10 Daniel-Constantin Mierla :
> yes, attach to the process that receives the sip request, in this case the
> udp receiver.
>
> Then if you use a simple config with t_relay(), go to tm module, see where
> t_relay() is defined, follow a bit the code and set a breakpoint by file and
> line numb
Hello,
On 6/10/11 11:16 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2011/6/10 Daniel-Constantin Mierla:
Could you set children to 1, attach with gdb to the sip worker handling the
invite, send the call and execute step by step to see which condition fails?
A simple config with t_relay() should make the debug
2011/6/10 Daniel-Constantin Mierla :
> Could you set children to 1, attach with gdb to the sip worker handling the
> invite, send the call and execute step by step to see which condition fails?
> A simple config with t_relay() should make the debugging easier.
Hi Daniel. Which worker should I atta
Hi again,
Then it is the time for Eugen to add it in his sip client and send
the patch for enhancing kamailio's presence server with rfc4481, as
well
:o)
I start my application, and make my own status be shown. I change my
status back and forth a few times between Away and DoNotDisturb (eac
On 6/10/11 10:07 PM, Craig Southeren wrote:
On 10/06/2011 1:01 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:..deleted
So, if a client uploads a presence document that contains a
element, that element could be sent by the PA when
the client goes offline, rather than the entire document being
discard
On 10/06/11 21:58, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
On 6/10/11 8:17 PM, Craig Southeren wrote:
On 10/06/2011 3:49 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
..deleted
Ok. But this happens when I start my application, so it does not
know anything about the contacts, and it receives empty body. So,
ev
On 10/06/2011 11:20 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
...deleted
Thank you so far for your explanations.
have you spotted in SIP/SIMPLE specs what has to be sent when the
presentity is offline? My quick google was not that succesful. Maybe
Inaki has the specs more fresh indexed in memory a
On 10/06/2011 3:49 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
..deleted
Ok. But this happens when I start my application, so it does not
know anything about the contacts, and it receives empty body. So,
even after this notify, it still does not know anything about that
contact, is that right?
Any
On 6/10/11 8:23 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2011/6/10 Iñaki Baz Castillo:
Maybe kamailio is taking the "order" field of the NAPTR incorrectly
and gives priority with higher values? I will check it ASAP.
Ok, I've created domain whose NAPTR record just includes a single
SIP+D2T entry (just S
On 6/10/11 8:49 PM, Craig Southeren wrote:
On 10/06/2011 11:20 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
...deleted
Thank you so far for your explanations.
have you spotted in SIP/SIMPLE specs what has to be sent when the
presentity is offline? My quick google was not that succesful. Maybe
Inak
On 6/10/11 8:17 PM, Craig Southeren wrote:
On 10/06/2011 3:49 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
..deleted
Ok. But this happens when I start my application, so it does not
know anything about the contacts, and it receives empty body. So,
even after this notify, it still does not know anyt
2011/6/10 Iñaki Baz Castillo :
> Maybe kamailio is taking the "order" field of the NAPTR incorrectly
> and gives priority with higher values? I will check it ASAP.
Ok, I've created domain whose NAPTR record just includes a single
SIP+D2T entry (just SIP over TCP).
My Kamailio (which uses UDP and
On 6/10/11 7:58 PM, Eugen Dedu wrote:
[...]
If the application starts by putting each contact as offline, there
will be no difference between no information known (while waiting a
notify) and offline.
Moreover, no reply to subscribe could be another status: presence error.
So I would say
Hello,
to understand the scenario:
- first branch has destination uri ($du) set
- it failed and gets to failure route where you call ds_next_domain()
and $du s still the one from first branch?
What do you mean that "not any of the nodes receive the packet ..."?
Cheers.
Daniel
On 6/10/11 6:43
On 10/06/11 16:07, Daniel-Constantine Mierla wrote:
On Jun 10, 2011, at 12:27 PM, Eugen Dedu
wrote:
On 10/06/11 12:18, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
On 6/10/11 12:04 PM, Eugen Dedu wrote:
Thank you very much for your answer.
Do you confirm that for kamailio, when a user has not
Hello.
I had a Kamailio version of 3.0.3 and during this time configured a
failover with simple routine. In short like this:
if (ds_next_domain()) {
xlog(.);
if (!t_relay()) {
xlog(.);
return;
}
return;
} else {
t_rep
On Jun 10, 2011, at 12:27 PM, Eugen Dedu
wrote:
> On 10/06/11 12:18, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 6/10/11 12:04 PM, Eugen Dedu wrote:
>>> Thank you very much for your answer.
>>>
>>> Do you confirm that for kamailio, when a user has not been online
>>> since a long time
2011/6/10 Klaus Darilion :
> Kamailio performs NAPTR lookups, but chooses UDP. I do not know why.
You are fully right. I've captured DNS traffic and wireshark clearly
shows a NAPTR record. And indeed kamailio prefers SIP over UDP with no
reason (it should prefer TCP as my kamailio does not speak T
Kamailio performs NAPTR lookups, but chooses UDP. I do not know why.
# kamailio -V
version: kamailio 3.1.3 (i386/linux)
flags: STATS: Off, USE_IPV6, USE_TCP, USE_TLS, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS,
USE_STUN, DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MEM, SHM_MMAP,
PKG_MALLOC, DBG_QM_MALLOC, USE_FUTEX
2011/6/10 Iñaki Baz Castillo :
> With your exact configuration, my kamailio 3.2.0-dev5 (debian package)
> does not perform NAPTR :(
Klaus, could you provide me the following information?
1) kamailio -V
2) Is compiled? a deb package?
3) Could you please call sip:anyth...@oversip.net and show me
2011/6/10 Klaus Darilion :
> My Kamailio 3.1.3 performs NATPR lookups:
>
> use_dns_cache = yes
> dns_try_naptr = yes
> dns_udp_pref=1
> dns_tcp_pref=1
> dns_tls_pref=1
> dns_sctp_pref=1
>
> dns_use_search_list=no
> dns_try_ipv6=yes
> dns_retr_time=1
> dns_retr_no=1
With your exact configuration,
My Kamailio 3.1.3 performs NATPR lookups:
use_dns_cache = yes
dns_try_naptr = yes
dns_udp_pref=1
dns_tcp_pref=1
dns_tls_pref=1
dns_sctp_pref=1
dns_use_search_list=no
dns_try_ipv6=yes
dns_retr_time=1
dns_retr_no=1
regards
Klaus
Am 09.06.2011 12:44, schrieb Iñaki Baz Castillo:
> Hi, I'm testing
On 6/10/11 12:27 PM, Eugen Dedu wrote:
On 10/06/11 12:18, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
On 6/10/11 12:04 PM, Eugen Dedu wrote:
Thank you very much for your answer.
Do you confirm that for kamailio, when a user has not been online
since a long time ago, (1) it answers with an empty
Hi Henning,
On 6/10/11 5:22 AM, Henning Westerholt wrote:
Hi Nathan,
do you need a interface in the configuration script, or do you like to you a
programming API to develop your own customer module?
Interface for the configuration script.
Thanks!
_
On 10/06/11 12:18, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
On 6/10/11 12:04 PM, Eugen Dedu wrote:
Thank you very much for your answer.
Do you confirm that for kamailio, when a user has not been online
since a long time ago, (1) it answers with an empty body notify (and
not with a body with Offl
Hello,
On 6/10/11 12:04 PM, Eugen Dedu wrote:
Thank you very much for your answer.
Do you confirm that for kamailio, when a user has not been online
since a long time ago, (1) it answers with an empty body notify (and
not with a body with Offline status), and more importantly (2) that
this m
Thank you very much for your answer.
Do you confirm that for kamailio, when a user has not been online since
a long time ago, (1) it answers with an empty body notify (and not with
a body with Offline status), and more importantly (2) that this means
the user is offline?
I ask this because t
On Thursday 09 June 2011, Nathan Angelacos wrote:
> I'm looking to build a set of contacts with q values based on SRV
> records for serial/parallel forking.
>
> I want "enum_query" (loading the contact set with a q value based on the
> order,preference of the NAPTR record) but the ruri is not an
30 matches
Mail list logo
