[OpenSIPS-Users] interaction between fix_nated_contact(), topology_hiding() and serial forking
jeff at ugnd.org
Wed Oct 28 18:30:01 EST 2020
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?
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:
>> 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
>> 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 .
>> : https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/issues/2172
>> Liviu Chircuwww.twitter.com/liviuchircu | www.opensips-solutions.com
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.opensips.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Users