[OpenSIPS-Users] RES: Register response going to wrong port

[Daniel Goepp]

Thanks Carlo, that fixed it!  It was strange, since I have other devices
that don't set rport either, and they don't have the same problem.

I had actually tried fix_nated_register and fix_nated_contact, they both had
the same results, and I'm not sure I'm exactly clear on the specific
difference between then.

-dg


On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 2:20 AM, AsteriskGuide <flavio at asteriskguide.com>
wrote:
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
>
>
> For REGISTER you should use fix_nated_register instead of
fix_nated_contact. The Contact header for REGISTER should not be changed.
 Try using force_rport before handling the NAT.  What really matters for
replies is the Via Header.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Flavio E. Goncalves
>
>
>
> De: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org [mailto:
users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] Em nome de Daniel Goepp
> Enviada em: Thursday, November 05, 2009 5:11 AM
> Para: users at lists.opensips.org
> Assunto: [OpenSIPS-Users] Register response going to wrong port
>
>
>
> Really banging my head here, so any help is much appreciated.  I am doing
some interop work on various devices, and one is causing some problems, and
I can't seem to tell why.  The problem is that the 401 is going back to
5060, not the port the device is coming through NAT from.
>
> U 76.102.118.209:1296 -> 10.251.27.180:5060
> REGISTER sip:vidtel.com:5060 SIP/2.0.
> To: "Daniel Goepp" <sip:2007 at vidtel.com <sip%3A2007 at vidtel.com>>.
> From: "Daniel Goepp" <sip:2007 at vidtel.com <sip%3A2007 at vidtel.com>
>;tag=868361b7108d.
> Contact: "Daniel Goepp" <sip:2007 at 192.168.1.115:5060>.
> Call-ID: c6fe66a3a272-4a136765ae26 at 192.168.1.115.
> CSeq: 27 REGISTER.
> User-Agent: AVSR-C3-ME/1.0.1.ME.149.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.115:5060;branch=z9hG4bK-828683511-102.
> Max-Forwards: 70.
> Expires: 3600.
> Content-Length: 0.
>
> U 10.251.27.180:5060 -> 76.102.118.209:5060
> SIP/2.0 401 Unauthorized.
> To: "Daniel Goepp" <sip:2007 at vidtel.com <sip%3A2007 at vidtel.com>
>;tag=c97b4d1cb1f3d0da549e06a8d482ef63.7365.
> From: "Daniel Goepp" <sip:2007 at vidtel.com <sip%3A2007 at vidtel.com>
>;tag=868361b7108d.
> Call-ID: c6fe66a3a272-4a136765ae26 at 192.168.1.115.
> CSeq: 27 REGISTER.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.115:5060
;branch=z9hG4bK-828683511-102;received=76.102.118.209.
> WWW-Authenticate: Digest realm="vidtel.com",
nonce="4af0cca800000047afe210458683fcb29c42c67bbfd52f53".
> Server: OpenSIPS (1.6.0-notls (i386/linux)).
> Content-Length: 0.
>
> I'm fixing contact info in my config:
>
>         if (nat_uac_test("3")) {
>                 setbflag(6); # Mark as NATed
>                 if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
>                         fix_nated_contact();
>                 }
>         }
>
> I'm interested in any input on how the destination port of the response is
being figured here.  I have several different devices hitting this server
with very similar signaling, coming from behind NAT, that don't have this
problem.
>
> Thanks
>
> -dg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20091105/2ba314dc/attachment.htm