2009/9/27 Olle E. Johansson :
>> As far as I understood, the original mail talks about Kamailio as proxy
>> and
>> Asterisk as registrar behind the proxy. Asterisk is not ready for that
>> scenario.
>
> Well, if Asterisk has proper support for outbound proxys compiled, it will
> work,
> but only wi
26 sep 2009 kl. 20.22 skrev Iñaki Baz Castillo:
El Jueves, 24 de Septiembre de 2009, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
escribió:
Hello,
On 24.09.2009 12:10 Uhr, catalina oancea wrote:
Hi,
In my scenario kamailio is not a registrar, it's just a proxy
forwarding requests from asterisk to the provider
El Sábado, 26 de Septiembre de 2009, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribió:
> On 26.09.2009 21:48 Uhr, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> > El Sábado, 26 de Septiembre de 2009, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribió:
> >> it was about possibility to consider "register" as dialog and try to
> >> route next registra
On 26.09.2009 21:48 Uhr, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
El Sábado, 26 de Septiembre de 2009, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribió:
it was about possibility to consider "register" as dialog and try to
route next registrations without doing dns.
Ok. Then she would do better by doing fixed rout
El Sábado, 26 de Septiembre de 2009, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribió:
> it was about possibility to consider "register" as dialog and try to
> route next registrations without doing dns.
Ok. Then she would do better by doing fixed routing of REGISTER requests
(based on From for example). She c
On 26.09.2009 20:22 Uhr, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
[...]
- the provider should add its own record route to REGISTER reply -- if
it is kamailio, that is simple via append_to_reply() from textops, just
before save() call.
This "hack" would work just in both, proxy and registrar, are Kamai
El Jueves, 24 de Septiembre de 2009, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribió:
> Hello,
>
> On 24.09.2009 12:10 Uhr, catalina oancea wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > In my scenario kamailio is not a registrar, it's just a proxy
> > forwarding requests from asterisk to the provider.
>
> I see.
>
> As Juha said, R
Hello,
On 25.09.2009 17:16 Uhr, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
[...]
In my scenario kamailio is not a registrar, it's just a proxy
forwarding requests from asterisk to the provider.
I see.
As Juha said, REGISTER does not create a real dialog, since the
contact in 200OK is the address of publis
As I said earlier, I misunderstood some things. sorry for the trouble.
2009/9/25 Olle E. Johansson :
>
> 24 sep 2009 kl. 12.46 skrev Daniel-Constantin Mierla:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 24.09.2009 12:10 Uhr, catalina oancea wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In my scenario kamailio is not a registrar, it's jus
24 sep 2009 kl. 12.46 skrev Daniel-Constantin Mierla:
Hello,
On 24.09.2009 12:10 Uhr, catalina oancea wrote:
Hi,
In my scenario kamailio is not a registrar, it's just a proxy
forwarding requests from asterisk to the provider.
I see.
As Juha said, REGISTER does not create a real dialog, si
24 sep 2009 kl. 12.04 skrev catalina oancea:
According to rfc3261, REGISTER is a dialog.
Just to seek clarity, I started reading the good old document again.
In section 10.2 I found this very clear statement:
"A REGISTER request does not establish a dialog."
/O
_
24 sep 2009 kl. 12.04 skrev catalina oancea:
According to rfc3261, REGISTER is a dialog.
As I have been discussing this many times and you seem so sure, can
you please point out where this is documented?
I've seen both kinds of implementations, some that assume that
REGISTER/40x and the
catalina oancea writes:
> I understand your point, but let's say the dialog is created:
>
> asteriskkamailioprovider(hostname)
> >dns lookup >
> INVITE
Hello,
On 24.09.2009 13:22 Uhr, catalina oancea wrote:
Hi again
I probably misunderstood the RFC.
I misunderstood your first email, I though is about registration
refreshes (send updates to same server). Not the authentication case,
because there is no dialog created in this situation, not
I understand your point, but let's say the dialog is created:
asteriskkamailioprovider(hostname)
>dns lookup >
INVITE INVITE
<
catalina oancea writes:
> I probably misunderstood the RFC. But an INVITE does create a dialog,
> and the situation:
>
> asteriskkamailioprovider(hostname)
> >dns lookup >
> INVITE 1
Hi again
I probably misunderstood the RFC. But an INVITE does create a dialog,
and the situation:
asteriskkamailioprovider(hostname)
>dns lookup >
INVITE 1 IN
Daniel-Constantin Mierla schrieb:
Hello,
On 24.09.2009 12:10 Uhr, catalina oancea wrote:
Hi,
In my scenario kamailio is not a registrar, it's just a proxy
forwarding requests from asterisk to the provider.
I see.
As Juha said, REGISTER does not create a real dialog, since the contact
i
catalina oancea schrieb:
According to rfc3261, REGISTER is a dialog.
Where did you found this. The second REGISTER does not have a to-tag -
thus it is clearly out-of-dialog.
My problem is: if this hostname resolves to more than one IP
addresses, and the 401 comes from IP1, then the second R
Hello,
On 24.09.2009 12:10 Uhr, catalina oancea wrote:
Hi,
In my scenario kamailio is not a registrar, it's just a proxy
forwarding requests from asterisk to the provider.
I see.
As Juha said, REGISTER does not create a real dialog, since the contact
in 200OK is the address of publisher n
Hi,
In my scenario kamailio is not a registrar, it's just a proxy
forwarding requests from asterisk to the provider.
Thanks,
Catalina
2009/9/24 Daniel-Constantin Mierla :
> Hello,
>
> On 24.09.2009 11:47 Uhr, catalina oancea wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> I tested the following scenario:
>>
>> a
Hello,
On 24.09.2009 11:47 Uhr, catalina oancea wrote:
Hi all,
I tested the following scenario:
astreiskkamailioprovider(hostname)
>dns lookup >
REGISTER 1 RE
According to rfc3261, REGISTER is a dialog.
My problem is: if this hostname resolves to more than one IP
addresses, and the 401 comes from IP1, then the second REGISTER goes
to IP2, then IP will continue to reject the message etc. Also, I am
not completely sure but I think the same problem occurs
catalina oancea writes:
> It seems that kamailio does dns lookup again when receiving REGISTER
> 2, although both registers are part of the same dialog. Is this the
> expected behavior?
i don't think that register requests establish any dialogs. when
registrar receives the second register, it
Hi all,
I tested the following scenario:
astreiskkamailioprovider(hostname)
>dns lookup >
REGISTER 1 REGISTER 1
<
25 matches
Mail list logo
