[OpenSIPS-Users] [Re: Routing problem with Record-Route]
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
bogdan at opensips.org
Thu Aug 30 14:50:22 CEST 2012
Hi,
OpenSIPS all the time adds is Route as a loose route, so for its own
Route, when doing loose_route() will act as loose router all the time.
Nevertheless, when checking the next hop, OpenSIPS can handle both a
strict or loose router (as next hop).
But once again, opensips itself does only loose routing for its Routes.
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com
On 08/28/2012 05:48 PM, Binan AL Halabi wrote:
> Hi Bogdan,
>
> i see in the opensips Docs the definition of loose_route() function:
>
> " The function performs routing of SIP requests which contain a route
> set. The name is a little bit confusing, as *this function also routes
> requests which are in the “strict router” format. "*
>
> so Does this function do the strict routing also ? according to which
> chapter in RFC this routing belong ?
>
> regards
>
> --- On *Tue, 8/28/12, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu /<bogdan at opensips.org>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org>
> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] [Re: Routing problem with Record-Route]
> To: "OpenSIPS users mailling list" <users at lists.opensips.org>
> Cc: "Binan AL Halabi" <binanalhalabi at yahoo.com>
> Date: Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 7:29 AM
>
> Hi,
>
> That is not true - OpenSIPS acts all the time as a loose router.
> The param you mentioned simply changes on how the "loose router"
> label should be advertised : (1) "lr" or (2) "lr=on" - but both do
> mean a loose router.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>
>
> On 08/28/2012 03:46 PM, Binan AL Halabi wrote:
>> Hi ,
>> the statment *modparam("rr", "enable_full_lr", 1)* in the script
>> lets opensips uses lr=on instead of just ;lr to work as loose
>> router, so it behaves as strict router where it should be loose
>> router in fail case, since it detects only ;lr in messages.
>>
>>
>> --- On *Mon, 8/27/12, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu /<bogdan at opensips.org>
>> </mc/compose?to=bogdan at opensips.org>/* wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org>
>> </mc/compose?to=bogdan at opensips.org>
>> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] [Re: Routing problem with
>> Record-Route]
>> To: mickael at winlux.fr </mc/compose?to=mickael at winlux.fr>
>> Cc: "OpenSIPS users mailling list" <users at lists.opensips.org>
>> </mc/compose?to=users at lists.opensips.org>
>> Date: Monday, August 27, 2012, 8:48 AM
>>
>> As the next destination should be 6.6.6.6, some stupid questions:
>>
>> 1) is 6.6.6.6 configured in domain module or as "alias" ?
>>
>> 2) have you check to loopback interface ? maybe the ACK is
>> spiraling
>> over there.
>>
>> Also, try to reproduce the ACK case, but enable full debug in
>> script for
>> the loose_route() function:
>> if (is_method=="ACK") setdebug(6);
>>
>> And post the output of opensips - this will give some clue on
>> what it is
>> doing.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>
>>
>> On 08/27/2012 06:41 PM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>> > 7.7.7.7 and 8.8.8.8 are both from the same instance of
>> opensips (same
>> > server 2 IPs interfaces).
>> >
>> > in opensips log, no error, just no forwarding to customer IPBX.
>> > but tomorrow I'll test with other debug option.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> >> The 7.7.7.7 and 8.8.8.8 IPs are both from the same
>> instance of opensips
>> >> (doing interface exchange) or there are 2 different SIP
>> entities ?
>> >>
>> >> Also, do you see any errors in the logs when the ACK is
>> handled ?
>> >>
>> >> regards,
>> >>
>> >> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>> >> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>> >> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 08/27/2012 05:58 PM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>> >>> Hi
>> >>> in attachement call flow and ACK from provider (this ACK
>> is not resend
>> >>> by
>> >>> opensips to customer IPBX).
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks
>> >>>
>> >>>> Hi,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Please post the ACK message your opensips proxy gets,
>> and also the
>> >>>> outbound ACK request (leaving your opensips) - Include
>> also the net
>> >>>> layer info (like src ip and port) - feel free to
>> masquerade the IPs,
>> >>>> but
>> >>>> do it consistently,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Regards,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>> >>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>> >>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 08/27/2012 09:17 AM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>> >>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>> do you think this may be the cause of my routing ACK
>> problem ?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>> loose route parameter lr , which can be present in sip
>> or sips
>> >>>>>> Record-Route and Route URIs to indicate that the proxy
>> server
>> >>>>>> identified
>> >>>>>> by the URI supports loose routing.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> RFC 3261 explains the "lr" parameter as just ";lr",
>> not lr=on. This
>> >>>>>> brokes
>> >>>>>> some UAs which add =on to the "lr". opensips adds=on
>> to be
>> >>>>>> compatible
>> >>>>>> with these UAs
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> //Binan.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --- On Fri, 8/24/12,
>> mickael at winlux.fr<mickael at winlux.fr> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> From: mickael at winlux.fr<mickael at winlux.fr>
>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] [Re: Routing problem with
>> >>>>>> Record-Route]
>> >>>>>> To: "OpenSIPS users mailling
>> list"<users at lists.opensips.org>
>> >>>>>> Date: Friday, August 24, 2012, 5:08 AM
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Exactly Opensips add lr=on and callee device transform
>> it into
>> >>>>>> lr;r2=on.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> my other devices (asterisk, avaya, etc ...) do not
>> transform lr...
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> My Opensips version is version: opensips 1.6.4-2-tls
>> (i386/freebsd)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> what is the difference between lr=on and lr;r2=on ?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> So OpenSIPS adds "lr=on" but the callee device
>> transform it into a
>> >>>>>>> "lr".....
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> What version of opensips are you
>> >>>>>> using?
>> >>>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>> >>>>>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>> >>>>>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 08/24/2012 02:27 PM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> Hi Bogdan-Andrei,
>> >>>>>>>> Thank you for your response.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Yes I confirm in INVITE I have 2 RR with lr=on:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> <sip:8.8.8.8;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> <sip:8.8.8.9;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> and in 200OK I have 1 RR with just lr:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> <sip:8.8.8.8;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>,<sip:8.8.8.9;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>> >>>>>>>> and in ACK I have 2 Route with lr:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> <sip:8.8.8.8;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> <sip:8.8.8.9;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Mickael,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Can you confirm (for the failed call) that OpenSIPS
>> added in
>> >>>>>>>>> INVITE
>> >>>>>>>>> RR
>> >>>>>>>>> hdrs with "lr=on" param and in the 200 OK or ACK
>> you get only "lr"
>> >>>>>>>>> param
>> >>>>>>>>> (with no value) ?
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>> >>>>>>>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>> >>>>>>>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On 08/24/2012 11:09 AM, mickael at winlux.fr wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi list,
>> >>>>>>>>>> I have a routing problem with my Opensips
>> >>>>>>>>>> version: opensips 1.6.4-2-tls (i386/freebsd)
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Indeed Opensips is unable to route ACK packet to final
>> >>>>>>>>>> destination
>> >>>>>>>>>> (look
>> >>>>>>>>>> attachement .txt).
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> The only difference with a normal call (Call OK), it's
>> >>>>>>>>>> Record-Route
>> >>>>>>>>>> formating. Customer's device send 200OK with
>> differents fields:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Test device with the problem (call NOT OK):
>> >>>>>>>>>> Ex: problem call = 1 field for 2 routes
>> >>>>>>>>>> Extract from the customer
>> >>>>>> 200OK
>> >>>>>>>>>> Record-Route:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> <sip:8.8.8.8;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>,<sip:9.9.9.9;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Test with another device (call OK)
>> >>>>>>>>>> Ex: normal call = 2 fields for 2 routes
>> >>>>>>>>>> Extract from the Customer 200OK
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Record-Route:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> <sip:8.8.8.8;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Record-Route:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> <sip:9.9.9.9;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-50237efd-8d49d7d0-5fb68102;xyz=3a2.86da31c4>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> My question is: This opensips version is able to
>> work with 1
>> >>>>>>>>>> record-route
>> >>>>>>>>>> field containing 2
>> >>>>>> informations ?
>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> regards
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>>>>>> 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
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> 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 </mc/compose?to=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/20120830/d1e12352/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Users
mailing list