[OpenSIPS-Users] NAT fixup question

Jeff Kronlage jeff at data102.com
Tue Oct 20 06:33:09 CEST 2009 

Bogdan,

I wish I could post something useful.  I've been tinkering with this all
evening, the catch is that one of our sip providers does things a tad
unusual and I have a number of normalization procedures in place that
make it hard to output something useful for this.

I can provide this information -

The inbound packet is:
22:19:32.479151 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 249, id 1369, offset 0, flags [none],
proto UDP (17), length 539) 64.111.16.10.45463 > 64.YYY.XX.XX.5060: SIP,
length: 511
        ACK sip:719330XXXX at 64.111.17.11:5060 SIP/2.0
        Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.105:5060;branch=z9hG4bK-c6f3cdea
        From:
<sip:719358ZZZZ at proxy.sip.data102.com>;tag=5d371768e81ef5fci0
        To: <sip:719330XXXX at proxy.sip.data102.com>;tag=3442594C-21D0
        Call-ID: 948E57D9-BC6611DE-AE38B8A5-3ADA34D9 at 64.111.17.2
        CSeq: 101 ACK
        Max-Forwards: 70
        Route:
<sip:64.YYY.XX.XX;lr=on;ftag=3442594C-21D0;did=03f.4363e5f6>
        Contact: 719358ZZZZ <sip:719358ZZZZ at 192.168.1.105:5060>
        User-Agent: Linksys/SPA2102-3.3.6
        Content-Length: 0

After I receive this packet and loose_route() is called, the RURI
(specifically the value of $ru, as confirmed via xlog) is set to:
sip:64.YYY.XX.XX;lr=on;ftag=3444FCF0-2256;did=10a.beb781a3
(note this is identical to the "Route" field - not sure how I missed
that prior to your mentioning it)

A debug value of 4 produces:
DBG:rr:after_loose: Topmost route URI:
'sip:64.YYY.XX.XX;lr=on;ftag=33F412AC-1CD1;did=a35.17b53e66' is me
(not sure if that is of any use)

I'm certain this is too vague to produce a solid answer, but any idea
where I might look next?

Thanks,

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org
[mailto:users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] On Behalf Of Bogdan-Andrei
Iancu
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 9:21 PM
To: OpenSIPS users mailling list
Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] NAT fixup question

RURI has nothing to do with the VIA part..

Also RURI is not to be changed during loose_route(), only if you have a 
strict router proxy in front of you....maybe you can post the inbound 
and outbound request (to see how the loose_route() is done)

Regards,
Bogdan

Jeff Kronlage wrote:
> The RURI.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org
> [mailto:users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] On Behalf Of Bogdan-Andrei
> Iancu
> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 9:13 PM
> To: OpenSIPS users mailling list
> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] NAT fixup question
>
> Jeff,
>
> the VIA hdr does not require mangling - the addition of the "received"

> param is enough to handle nat issues. So the VIA you posted is correct

> form NAT traversal point of view.
>
> Regarding the user part of the URI - what URI you are talking about? 
> RURI ? TO / FROM uri? Contact URI ?
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
>
> Jeff Kronlage wrote:
>   
>> Thanks Bogdan,
>>
>> An unrelated question:
>>
>> Does anything special need to be done with "via" statements when
>> implementing NAT transversal?
>>
>> Fix_nated_contact() takes care of the contact field for me, but I
>>     
> still
>   
>> end up with:
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>>
>>     
>
192.168.1.105:5060;rport=42080;received=64.YYY.XX.XX;branch=z9hG4bK-e4e5
>   
>> cd84
>>
>> I'm having some random problems with the user part of the URI
randomly
>> vanishing after I call loose_route() when NAT is involved, and I'm
>> thinking these are related.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Kronlage
>> Senior IT Engineer, Data102
>> 102 South Tejon, Suite #1250
>> Colorado Springs, CO 80903
>> (719) 387-0000 x 1335 direct
>> (719) 578-8844 fax
>> jeff at data102.com / http://www.data102.com
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org
>> [mailto:users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] On Behalf Of Bogdan-Andrei
>> Iancu
>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 4:07 PM
>> To: OpenSIPS users mailling list
>> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Additional info on potential
>>     
> registration
>   
>> issue
>>
>> so DB ONLY mode......simply ignore the warning (see its meaning in my

>> previous post) . The contacts will still be shared, but the socket 
>> information discarded.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bogdan
>>
>> Jeff Kronlage wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> Usrloc mode is 3.  
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jeff Kronlage
>>> Senior IT Engineer, Data102
>>> 102 South Tejon, Suite #1250
>>> Colorado Springs, CO 80903
>>> (719) 387-0000 x 1335 direct
>>> (719) 578-8844 fax
>>> jeff at data102.com / http://www.data102.com
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org
>>> [mailto:users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] On Behalf Of Bogdan-Andrei
>>> Iancu
>>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 11:32 AM
>>> To: OpenSIPS users mailling list
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Additional info on potential
>>>     
>>>       
>> registration
>>   
>>     
>>> issue
>>>
>>> So, this is the problem - each opensips instance loads only the
>>>       
> usrloc
>   
>>>     
>>>       
>>   
>>     
>>> records that have the a local socket corresponding to that instance.
>>>     
>>>       
>> In 
>>   
>>     
>>> other words, if the record was saved by the other instance, opensips

>>> will not load it.
>>>
>>> what db_mode do you use for usrloc?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Bogdan
>>>
>>> Jeff Kronlage wrote:
>>>   
>>>     
>>>       
>>>> Yes, shared location table over multiple servers.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org
>>>> [mailto:users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] On Behalf Of
Bogdan-Andrei
>>>> Iancu
>>>> Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 10:33 PM
>>>> To: OpenSIPS users mailling list
>>>> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Additional info on potential
>>>>     
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>> registration
>>>   
>>>     
>>>       
>>>> issue
>>>>
>>>> Hi Jeff,
>>>>
>>>> Do you use a shared location table (via multiple registrar servers)
>>>>         
> ?
>   
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Bogdan
>>>>
>>>> Jeff Kronlage wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>     
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>> I'm getting this over and over in my syslog:
>>>>>
>>>>> WARNING:usrloc:get_all_db_ucontacts: non-local socket
>>>>> <udp:HI.DDE.N.12:5060>...ignoring
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>   
>>     
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>   


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users at lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

More information about the Users mailing list