[OpenSIPS-Users] [Re: Routing problem with Record-Route]

[Hubert Mickael]

Hi,
Yes,* CUSTOMER_DEVICE_SIP_DOMAIN *is insert to "domain" table in 
opensips's database.

Le 31/08/2012 15:48, Binan AL Halabi a écrit :
> Hi,
> Is *CUSTOMER_DEVICE_SIP_DOMAIN defined in opensips* ?
>
> //Binan
>
> --- On *Fri, 8/31/12, Kevin Mathy /<k.mathy at hexanet.fr>/* wrote:
>
>
>     From: Kevin Mathy <k.mathy at hexanet.fr>
>     Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] [Re: Routing problem with Record-Route]
>     To: "Bogdan-Andrei Iancu" <bogdan at opensips.org>, "OpenSIPS users
>     mailling list" <users at lists.opensips.org>
>     Date: Friday, August 31, 2012, 5:53 AM
>
>     Hi Bogdan,
>
>     We've got some news about our problem with record-routes.
>     In fact, it seems that if we change Contact header sent by
>     customer's device, everything work fine. Explanations :
>
>     Before, in all message sent by customer's device, particularly
>     200OK, Contact header was like *Contact:
>     <sip:+333XXXXXXXX at CUSTOMER_DEVICE_SIP_DOMAIN>*
>     In this situation, OpenSIPS was unable to route correctly ACK
>     messages following this 200OK.
>
>     Then, we've change the manner which Contact header is sent, and
>     now it's like *Contact: <sip:+333XXXXXXXX at CUSTOMER_DEVICE_IP>*
>     And in this situation, everything seems to be OK, all message,
>     including ACK, are correctly routed.
>
>     Further, we are sure that DNS resolution of CUSTOMER_SIP_DOMAIN
>     returns exactly CUSTOMER_DEVICE_IP, so, it doesn't seems to be a
>     DNS resolution problem...
>
>     If it can help you !
>
>     Thanks a lot,
>
>     *Kevin MATHY*
>     *HEXANET*
>     *
>     --
>     *
>     Téléphone : 03.26.79.30.05
>     Web : www.hexanet.fr <http://www.hexanet.fr>
>
>     Pour toute demande de support, merci de contacter le
>     *03.51.08.42.07*, ou bien d'adresser un e-mail à
>     *support at hexanet.fr </mc/compose?to=support at hexanet.fr>*
>
>
>
>
>     2012/8/29 <mickael at winlux.fr </mc/compose?to=mickael at winlux.fr>>
>
>         Hi Bogdan,
>         we will do this debug before end of week or begin of next week
>         and we will
>         send our results.
>
>         bye
>
>         > Hi Kevin,
>         >
>         > This looks like OpenSIPS does not recognize the Route as its
>         own IPs and
>         > also seeing the next hop as a strict router.
>         >
>         > To sort this out in the fastest way, see my prev request on
>         the logs for
>         > ACK processing (with the debug=6).
>         >
>         > Regards,
>         >
>         > Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>         > OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>         > http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>         >
>         >
>         > On 08/28/2012 03:22 PM, Kevin Mathy wrote:
>         >> Hi Bogdan,
>         >>
>         >> I'm working with Mickael about this problem, and we have some
>         >> informations which may help you (and then help us ;-) ) :
>         >>
>         >> We have found that "loose_route" function modify the
>         Request-URI
>         >> variable ($ru), as you can see below :
>         >>
>         >> ACK message comes from provider, with $ru =
>         sip:+333XXXXXXXX at 6.6.6.6
>         </mc/compose?to=sip%3A%2B333XXXXXXXX at 6.6.6.6>
>         >> <mailto:sip%3A%2B333XXXXXXXX at 6.6.6.6
>         </mc/compose?to=sip%253A%252B333XXXXXXXX at 6.6.6.6>>
>         >> After, loose_route function is executed, and $ru become
>         like $ru
>         >> =
>         >>
>         sip:7.7.7.7;lr;r2=on;ftag=c97942d9-13c4-503ca77b-ef8c9eef-760f27a5;xyz=c12.18aedaa5
>         >>
>         >> The last $ru value results from a Route header
>         >>
>         >> For information, Record-route of previous message (200OK)
>         is composed
>         >> with two record-route in the same field, comma separated.
>         >> Is Opensips 1.6.4 able to interpret this type of Record-route ?
>         >>
>         >> Is loose_route function using Route headers of previous
>         messages
>         >> (200OK before ACK) to route this message ? Or is it using
>         only actual
>         >> message's Route headers ?
>         >>
>         >> Thanks in advance,
>         >> If you need further informations, feel free to ask us.
>         >>
>         >> Regards,
>         >>
>         >> *Kevin MATHY*
>         >> *HEXANET*
>         >> *
>         >> --
>         >> *
>         >> Téléphone : 03.26.79.30.05
>         >> Web : www.hexanet.fr <http://www.hexanet.fr>
>         <http://www.hexanet.fr>
>         >>
>         >> Pour toute demande de support, merci de contacter le
>         *03.51.08.42.07*,
>         >> ou bien d'adresser un e-mail à *support at hexanet.fr
>         </mc/compose?to=support at hexanet.fr>
>         >> <mailto:support at hexanet.fr </mc/compose?to=support at hexanet.fr>>
>
>
>     -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120831/883f5e2b/attachment-0001.htm>