[OpenSIPS-Users] interaction between fix_nated_contact(), topology_hiding() and serial forking

Jeff Pyle jeff at ugnd.org
Wed Oct 28 18:15:50 EST 2020

Hey Liviu,

fix_nated_contact() before topology_hiding().  Got it.  As far as losing
the fixed contact during a serial fork, I'll do more testing to localize
exactly which combination of circumstances causes this to surface and open
a bug report.

- Jeff

On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 1:28 PM Liviu Chircu <liviu at opensips.org> wrote:

> Hi!
> On 28.10.2020 18:49, Jeff Pyle wrote:
> First, I lose the updated Contact from fix_nated_contact() after a serial
> fork.  Is this expected?
> I would assume the `fix_nated_contact()` lump changes get backed up into
> shared memory, then made available during the failure_route.  Anything else
> and IMHO it looks like a bug.  Opinions welcome.
> Second, I've determined that if the Contact URI is not wrapped in <>,
> that's when I get the "second attempt to change URI Contact" error when
> running fix_nated_contact() in the branch_route[].  This feels like a bug.
> This one is a known, documented issue.  Long story short: you should
> always call fix_nated_contact() _before_ topology_hiding().  See this truth
> table for more info [1].
> [1]: https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/issues/2172
> --
> Liviu Chircuwww.twitter.com/liviuchircu | www.opensips-solutions.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201028/5bce1ea9/attachment.html>

More information about the Users mailing list