g von
Nagorny, Dimitry
Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. April 2016 09:49
An: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
Betreff: [SR-Users] force_send_socket
Hi all,
I've configured Kamailio to use TLS and it has two NICs, 192.x.x.x extern to a
PSTN and 10.250.5.74 intern to FreeSWITCH. Kamailio has
&
Hi all,
I've configured Kamailio to use TLS and it has two NICs, 192.x.x.x extern to a
PSTN and 10.250.5.74 intern to FreeSWITCH. Kamailio has
"listen=tls:10.250.5.74:5071" and later on in the config I fire
"force_send_socket(tls:10.250.5.74:5071)". For some reason on calls from
FreeSWITCH via
Hello,
inaddr any is special as a single socket receiving all traffic, but then
it has its own limitations when attempting to send.
Kamailio is building the list of sockets at startup and use that at
runtime, so it is not possible to have a new socket added at runtime.
However, depending on what
Hello,
When binding Kamailio to 0.0.0.0, Kamailio no longer recognises any
specific IP address homed on the system as being a "socket" for purposes
of forcing traffic out of any specific interface (i.e. setting $fs), or
any other purpose for which ingress and egress "sockets" are tracked
(e.g
List
Emne: Re: [SR-Users] force_send_socket in event route tm:local-request
Hello,
I think the ougoing request is already created in that event route, the
set advertise address being used too late from that perspective --
however, there is no hook before to set it.
Open an enhancement issue on
Hello,
I think the ougoing request is already created in that event route, the
set advertise address being used too late from that perspective --
however, there is no hook before to set it.
Open an enhancement issue on the tracker not to forget about it and I
will check to see if there is a
Hi,
Our kamailio 4.0.6 proxy uses pua/pua_dialoginfo and an external presence
server.
The PUBLISH requests generated by pua* appear in tm:local-request event route.
Before sending, we call set_advertised_address and force_send_socket.
Still the requests have the IP address from the first "listen
Try with a "static" assignment with force_send_socket(). If this works,
try a static assignment with $fs. If this works, try the dynamic
assignment with PVs.
regards
Klaus
On 11.12.2013 11:32, Keith wrote:
Thanks for the info guys, unfortunately it's not sending the from ip
address properly n
On 12/11/2013 05:32 AM, Keith wrote:
Thanks for the info guys, unfortunately it's not sending the from ip
address properly now. I am using dispatcher to route these calls so not
sure if the $fs is working properly?
Can you be a little more specific as to what you mean? Are you saying
that th
Thanks for the info guys, unfortunately it's not sending the from ip
address properly now. I am using dispatcher to route these calls so not
sure if the $fs is working properly?
Any more ideas?
Thanks
Keith
___
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (Open
On 11/12/13 10:53, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 12/11/2013 04:48 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
On 11/12/13 10:46, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 12/11/2013 04:45 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Actually, to work, the above line has to be:
$fs = "udp:" + $sel(cfg_get.kamailio.bindip) + ":
On 12/11/2013 04:48 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
On 11/12/13 10:46, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 12/11/2013 04:45 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Actually, to work, the above line has to be:
$fs = "udp:" + $sel(cfg_get.kamailio.bindip) + ":5060";
I never did understand that. Som
On 11/12/13 10:46, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 12/11/2013 04:45 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Actually, to work, the above line has to be:
$fs = "udp:" + $sel(cfg_get.kamailio.bindip) + ":5060";
I never did understand that. Some PVs seem to be substituted inside a
string literal, ot
On 12/11/2013 04:45 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Actually, to work, the above line has to be:
$fs = "udp:" + $sel(cfg_get.kamailio.bindip) + ":5060";
I never did understand that. Some PVs seem to be substituted inside a
string literal, others are not. What's the rule?
-- Alex
On 11/12/13 10:35, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 12/11/2013 04:31 AM, Keith wrote:
Hi,
I am using force_send_socket as I have two interfaces. It works fine but
at the moment I am hard coding the IP address. I want to use a variable
instead, I have tried the following:
force_send_socket($sel(cfg_get
On 12/11/2013 04:31 AM, Keith wrote:
Hi,
I am using force_send_socket as I have two interfaces. It works fine but
at the moment I am hard coding the IP address. I want to use a variable
instead, I have tried the following:
force_send_socket($sel(cfg_get.kamailio.bindip);
But kamailio doesn't s
Hi,
I am using force_send_socket as I have two interfaces. It works fine but at
the moment I am hard coding the IP address. I want to use a variable
instead, I have tried the following:
force_send_socket($sel(cfg_get.kamailio.bindip);
But kamailio doesn't start and complains about the format.
A
Hi Marius,
On 12/15/2011 05:47 PM, marius zbihlei wrote:
> I have attached an improved version (uses inet_pton instead of manually
> parsing the address) of the str2ip6 function that was failing initially.
> Can you test it against force_send_socket() with an IP address in the
> form [ipv6_address
On 12/15/2011 06:33 PM, Andreas Granig wrote:
So, to sum it up:
If you want to use IPv6, use $fs instead of force_send_socket() (or
maybe multihoming, haven't tried that yet), and set dns_try_ipv6=yes.
Andreas
Hello,
I have attached an improved version (uses inet_pton instead of manually
pa
So, to sum it up:
If you want to use IPv6, use $fs instead of force_send_socket() (or
maybe multihoming, haven't tried that yet), and set dns_try_ipv6=yes.
Andreas
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
SIP Express Router (SER) and
Hi,
Alright, dns_try_ipv6=yes did the trick.
Thanks,
Andreas
On 12/15/2011 11:55 AM, Andreas Granig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is the full sip trace of the hop proxy->lb (SDP snipped), this
> should help getting an idea what's going on. What the lb does it taking
> the value from P-R-Uri and tries t
On 12/15/2011 04:41 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
On 12/15/11 1:18 PM, marius zbihlei wrote:
On 12/14/2011 07:28 PM, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hey Dani
Hello,
Actually, looking at the code I've observed some weird behavior : for
example to fix the force_send_socket IPv6 address, a
Hello,
On 12/15/11 1:18 PM, marius zbihlei wrote:
On 12/14/2011 07:28 PM, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hey Daniel,
On 12/14/2011 06:00 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
is the ipv6 address in between square brackets (can you give exact
usage
of the foce_send_socket())? It should work as the bridg
On 12/14/2011 07:28 PM, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hey Daniel,
On 12/14/2011 06:00 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
is the ipv6 address in between square brackets (can you give exact usage
of the foce_send_socket())? It should work as the bridging ipv4-ipv6 is
using the same mechanism -- may be a
Hi,
Here is the full sip trace of the hop proxy->lb (SDP snipped), this
should help getting an idea what's going on. What the lb does it taking
the value from P-R-Uri and tries to send it to that destination (no $du
will get set on the lb):
U 2011/12/15 11:45:34.357000 127.0.0.1:5080 -> 127.0.0.1
Hello,
On 12/15/11 11:26 AM, Andreas Granig wrote:
On 12/15/2011 11:10 AM, Andreas Granig wrote:
On 12/15/2011 10:19 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
ERROR: tm [ut.h:295]: ERROR: uri2dst: failed to resolve "[x::x]"
:unresolvable A or request (-7)
Is there something I haven't consider
On 12/15/2011 11:10 AM, Andreas Granig wrote:
> On 12/15/2011 10:19 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>>> ERROR: tm [ut.h:295]: ERROR: uri2dst: failed to resolve "[x::x]"
>>> :unresolvable A or request (-7)
>>>
>>> Is there something I haven't considered yet? Why would it try a DNS
>>> loo
Hi Daniel,
On 12/15/2011 10:19 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>> ERROR: tm [ut.h:295]: ERROR: uri2dst: failed to resolve "[x::x]"
>> :unresolvable A or request (-7)
>>
>> Is there something I haven't considered yet? Why would it try a DNS
>> lookup for this R-URI?
> is it failing over al
Hello,
On 12/14/11 7:12 PM, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hey,
One more thing related to outbound routing. Maybe this question is
stupid, but I still have to learn a lot regarding IPv6 :)
So my Jitsi registered fine, the contact in location table looks like this:
contact:
sip:testuser1@[x::x]:5060;tr
Hello,
On 12/14/11 6:28 PM, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hey Daniel,
On 12/14/2011 06:00 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
is the ipv6 address in between square brackets (can you give exact usage
of the foce_send_socket())? It should work as the bridging ipv4-ipv6 is
using the same mechanism -- may
Hey,
One more thing related to outbound routing. Maybe this question is
stupid, but I still have to learn a lot regarding IPv6 :)
So my Jitsi registered fine, the contact in location table looks like this:
contact:
sip:testuser1@[x::x]:5060;transport=udp;registering_acc=192_168_51_133
When I ca
Hey Daniel,
On 12/14/2011 06:00 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
> is the ipv6 address in between square brackets (can you give exact usage
> of the foce_send_socket())? It should work as the bridging ipv4-ipv6 is
> using the same mechanism -- may be an issue with the exported function
> to con
Hello,
is the ipv6 address in between square brackets (can you give exact usage
of the foce_send_socket())? It should work as the bridging ipv4-ipv6 is
using the same mechanism -- may be an issue with the exported function
to config, though. Can you try to set $fs as alternative to
force_send
On 12/14/2011 05:16 PM, Andreas Granig wrote:
> Is it possible to use force_send_socket() with an IPv6 address in
> Kamailio 3.1? I get the error
>
> ERROR: fix_actions: force_send_socket: could not resolve
> X:X:X:X:X:X:X:X:5060
Actually it doesn't include the 5060, so it really says:
Hi,
Is it possible to use force_send_socket() with an IPv6 address in
Kamailio 3.1? I get the error
ERROR: fix_actions: force_send_socket: could not resolve
X:X:X:X:X:X:X:X:5060
where X:X:X:X:X:X:X:X is my IPv6 address.
Another problem (not sure if it's a real problem but looks weird) i
Thank you all. It's works.
BR
Ernest
On 30. 06. 2010 14:15, Geoffrey Mina wrote:
##
##
# Failure route 'pstn-failover'
failure_route[1]
{
##
##
# Failure route 'pstn-failover'
failure_route[1]
{
xlog("L_INFO", "Failure route for PSTN entered - M=$rm RURI=$ru F=$fu
T=$tu IP=$si ID=$ci\n");
2010/6/30 Ernest Mavrel
>
> How can I move force_send_socket() call into branch_route?
Use t_on_branch("N") before t_relay(); so after that each branch would
run into branch_route[N] in which you should invoke
force_send_socket().
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
Hi
How can I move force_send_socket() call into branch_route? Could
someone give me an example, please.
Thank you
Ernest
I have this script:
# Failure route 'pstn-failover'
###
Yeah, Juha's suggestion worked perfectly. As soon as I moved the
force_send_socket() call into branch_route everything started working.
Thanks.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 5:20 AM, Klaus Darilion <
klaus.mailingli...@pernau.at> wrote:
> IIRC force_send_socket operates on "branch[0]". Now it depends
IIRC force_send_socket operates on "branch[0]". Now it depends how the
the new branch is added, e.g. if send--socket properties are copied into
new branch or not. IRRC there were some changes either in 1.5 or 3.0.
You can also access a branch's aprameter directly:
http://sip-router.org/wiki/coo
Yes, I have the same issue with 1.4.2 version.
On 28. 06. 2010 19:08, Geoffrey Mina wrote:
I am having an issue with 1.5.4 where force_send_socket()
isn't behaving as I would expect.
I have an LCR scenario where depending on which gateway I am sending
to, I send from a different socket.
Geoffrey Mina writes:
> I have added a lot of debug lines, so I am 100% sure the second call to
> force_send_socket is happening.
try calling force_send_socket in branch route (after setting
t_on_branch) in failure route.
> Am I misusing this module in some way?
lcr module has nothing to do wit
I am having an issue with 1.5.4 where force_send_socket() isn't behaving as
I would expect.
I have an LCR scenario where depending on which gateway I am sending to, I
send from a different socket.
It appears that calling force_send_socket from failure_route has no affect
on the routing. In my in
44 matches
Mail list logo
