Hi,
One of the biggest problem with VOIP service is how to defend against
unlimited usage. openning the SIP to an end user is pretty scary thing as
the following 3 things could happen:
1. people uses the same username/password for multiple phone. This is
addressed by one discussion thread in
I put this in:
if (t_check_trans()) {
t_reply("503", "Service Unavailable");
} else {
sl_send_reply("503", "Service Unavailable");
}
And it seems to work fine. But I suppose send_reply would be much
simpler... :-)
On Apr
David Aldworth writes:
> kamailio server sends the provisional response to customer UA if we
> cannot find a route for the call. I am using:
>
> t_reply("503", "Service Unavailable");
>
> However this results in:
>
> ERROR:tm:w_t_reply: failed to send a t_reply to a message for which
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 1:19 PM, David Aldworth wrote:
> Is there a way to tell if a transaction already exists before executing
> t_newtran(); ?
I suppose you could use t_check_trans().
But I haven't tried it.
> If the route query scripts executes resulted in a route, but then we get a
> 5XX f
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 12:53 PM, David Aldworth wrote:
> I'm am attempting to return a 503 "Service Unavailable" after my
> kamailio server sends the provisional response to customer UA if we
> cannot find a route for the call. I am using:
>
> t_reply("503", "Service Unavailable");
>
> However th
I'm am attempting to return a 503 "Service Unavailable" after my
kamailio server sends the provisional response to customer UA if we
cannot find a route for the call. I am using:
t_reply("503", "Service Unavailable");
However this results in:
ERROR:tm:w_t_reply: failed to send a t_reply to a
Perhaps I should clarify what I am looking for a bit. I am guessing
based on the log "no via found in reply" that I would need to check
for this condition in my onreply_route[1] block.
Based on my knowledge of SIP, all reply responses are REQUIRED to have
a VIA header to ensure the response trave
Sorry for the potentially stupid question...
I'm trying to make sense of the standard kamailio.cfg file. At the
top, it says to remove the #n# comments to enable nat processing.
Looking down in the code, I see that one of the sections to be enabled
is route[4]. But, no where else in the file do
Can you provide some statistics about how the system performs?
- how many cps do you handle,
- how many workers did you configured,
- udp only or tcp and udp traffic,
- the cpu load/utilization for the config that you have.
Regards,
Ovidiu Sas
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Geoffrey Mina
Hello,
I am seeing the following message repeatedly in my log file. I am
guessing I have a server or servers misbehaving. Where might I be
able to check for this error condition and log appropriately? I have
attached my current configuration file for reference.
Thanks!
Geoff
Apr 10 11:45:40 a
I am currently using LCR with 180,000 routes. I have an 8 core 2.0Ghz
system with 8GB or RAM.
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Ovidiu Sas wrote:
> The names in the carrierroute are a little bit confusing ...
> With lcr, you route based on 'priority'.
> With carierroute, you have several alterna
The names in the carrierroute are a little bit confusing ...
With lcr, you route based on 'priority'.
With carierroute, you have several alternatives (take a look at
cr_route
http://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/1.5.x/carrierroute.html#id2467823):
- route inside the same 'carrier' based on 'doma
12 matches
Mail list logo
