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

[Jeff Pyle]

Liviu,

It looks like the fixed/update contact is lost only when topology_hiding()
is involved.  Would you prefer a separate issue, or shall I append the
issue you referenced before?


- Jeff


On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 2:15 PM Jeff Pyle <jeff at ugnd.org> wrote:

> 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/20201028/0d798434/attachment.html>