[OpenSIPS-Users] topology hiding in opensips

[Bogdan-Andrei Iancu]

I see no indication of creating a dialog in your script sample :(...Are 
you sure about this ?

Regards,

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com

On 01/24/2017 02:20 PM, Alberto Gonzales wrote:
> I am using dialog in my script,
> here is the part of main function
>
> # apply transformations from dialplan table
>        dp_translate("0","$rU/$rU");
>
> # route calls based on prefix
>        if ( !do_routing("1","W",,"$var(rule_attrs)","$var(gw_attrs)") ) {
>                send_reply("404","No Route found");
>                exit;
>        }
>
>        $acc_extra(gwid)=$avp(gw_id);
>
>        t_on_failure("GW_FAILOVER");
>
>        do_accounting("db|log","cdr|missed",);
> #NAT
>        if (isbflagset(NAT)) setflag(NAT);
> #NAT
> #TOPOHIDE
>         toopology_hiding("UC");
> #TOPOHIDE
>        route(RELAY);
>
> }
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
> <bogdan at opensips.org <mailto:bogdan at opensips.org>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     It should be ok, but in your case the TH will not benefit from the
>     dialog module (you do not use it) - all the info to he hidden will
>     be appended to the Contact hdr (as extra param), while when using
>     the dialog support, this info is stored into the dialog.
>
>     To be honest, I never tried the combination of nathelper and TH
>     _without_ dialog support. But give it a try...if you get a trace,
>     I can check if ok.
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>     OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>     http://www.opensips-solutions.com <http://www.opensips-solutions.com>
>
>     On 01/24/2017 02:03 PM, Alberto Gonzales wrote:
>>     Thanks Bogdan, Well, I have fix_nated_contact() at the very top
>>     of my script :
>>     route{        force_rport();       if (nat_uac_test("23")) {
>>                fix_nated_contact();           setflag(NAT);       }
>>            if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) {
>>                    sl_send_reply("483","Too Many
>>     Hops");               exit;       }
>>     ....
>>     ....
>>             if (has_totag()) { # sequential request withing a dialog
>>     should # take the path determined by record-routing ####
>>     remplazar : if (loose_route()) { if (topology_hiding_match()) { ...
>>     ...
>>     *## esconder topologia antes de pasar la llamada*
>>     topology_hiding("UC");       route(RELAY);}
>>     so is my script correct ?
>>     I just want to make sure I have a correct script before I do any
>>     further work on this.
>>     Thanks.
>>     On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>     <bogdan at opensips.org <mailto:bogdan at opensips.org>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi, You can do TH with nathelper, BUT be sure to create the
>>         dialog + TH AFTER doing the fix_nated_contact(). Regards,
>>
>>         Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>         OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>         http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>         <http://www.opensips-solutions.com>
>>
>>         On 01/20/2017 12:42 PM, Alberto Gonzales wrote:
>>>         We used instruction in the book, which states at the end of
>>>         the paragraph this :
>>>         Topology hiding limitations
>>>         You cannot easily combine topology hiding with NAT traversal
>>>         because both the
>>>         processes mangle the Contact header. Topology hiding will
>>>         not hide the address and
>>>         other information contained in other headers such as the
>>>         display in the From header.
>>>         To change the From header, you can use the
>>>         uac_replace_from() function.
>>>         I think our problem comes from the fact that we are using
>>>         nathelper and also an rtpproxy in our script.
>>>         can anyone provide help about activating topology hiding
>>>         along with nathelper ?
>>>         thanks in advance.
>>>         On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Alberto Gonzales
>>>         <albertosgonzale at gmail.com
>>>         <mailto:albertosgonzale at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>             I forgot to mention that doing this resulted in opensips
>>>             crashing after 20 minutes :)
>>>             On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Alberto Gonzales
>>>             <albertosgonzale at gmail.com
>>>             <mailto:albertosgonzale at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>                 Hello grupo,
>>>                 We have configured topology hiding in opensips 2.2
>>>                 this way :
>>>                 please confirm to us this is the only thing we need
>>>                 to do or is there anything else that needs to be added.
>>>                 route {
>>>                 ....
>>>                 ....
>>>                         if (has_totag()) { # sequential request
>>>                 withing a dialog should # take the path determined
>>>                 by record-routing #### remplazar : if
>>>                 (loose_route()) { if (topology_hiding_match()) { ...
>>>                 ...
>>>                 *## esconder topologia antes de pasar la llamada*
>>>                 topology_hiding("UC");       route(RELAY);}
>>>                 also what could be a quick test to see if this
>>>                 hiding is working or not.
>>>                 thanks in advance.
>>>                 Alberto
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Users mailing list
>>>         Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>>>         http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>         <http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20170124/6fbd7fde/attachment-0001.html>