[OpenSIPS-Users] NAT fixup question
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
bogdan at voice-system.ro
Tue Oct 20 21:32:16 CEST 2009
Jeff,
in domain is not your ip , but the callee IP ("64.111.17.11" ) ! if not
the case, please enable full debug (set debug=6) and then make a call
and send me the output
Regards,
Bogdan
Jeff Kronlage wrote:
> Bogdan,
>
> The pertinent part of my config file contains this snippet:
>
> $var(ruriuser) = $rU;
> if (has_totag()) {
> xlog("DEBUG1 ru is $ru, du is $du");
> if (loose_route()) {
> xlog("DEBUG2 ru is $ru, du is $du");
> $rU = $var(ruriuser); #Hack job
> ....
>
> Between my first xlog and second xlog is where the change happens to the
> $rU value. I reset the $rU value at the bottom in a terrible hack job
> that's getting my couple of NAT users by for the moment, but I'm
> obviously not happy with the way I'm handling it.
>
> Looking at the documentation for loose_route --
> "The name is a little bit confusing, as this function also routes
> requests which are in the "strict router" format."
>
> Does loose_route() return true if strict routing? If not, then I
> imagine that's not what's happening, because my 2nd xlog wouldn't even
> execute
>
> Also, I don't have my IP address in my local domains, and I'm not using
> aliases.
>
> 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: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 10:15 AM
> To: OpenSIPS users mailling list
> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] NAT fixup question
>
> HI Jeff,
>
> Just a wild guess - looking at the RURI and ROUTE hdrs, I would say your
>
> opensips is doing strict routing and not loose routing - this may happen
>
> when the IP in RURI is recognized as local SIP domain....
>
> So, have you added "64.111.17.11" IP as alias in script or in domain
> table ? if so, please remove it!
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
>
>
>
> Jeff Kronlage wrote:
>
>> Please also note this only happens on reinvites - the initial invite
>>
> is
>
>> fine.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org
>> [mailto:users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Kronlage
>> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 10:33 PM
>> To: OpenSIPS users mailling list
>> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] NAT fixup question
>>
>> 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:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>
More information about the Users
mailing list