[OpenSIPS-Users] Incorrect callid in ACK

[Mark Farmer]

Thanks for the reply John!

Checking things over, the tags look fine.

According to the logs the ACK is being forwarded with the original Call-ID
header.
It seems to arrive at the next hop as having been encrypted by
topology_hiding() but in the log of that next hop I get a match failure
because the original header doesn't match what's in the existing dialog.

WARNING:dialog:dlg_onroute: tight matching failed for ACK with callid='
42284230-3832136123-249469431 at sbc-uk-l-far07b.uk.sdin.bt.net'/60,
ftag='3832136123-1536789624'/21, ttag='2e31e1179f3440fca8aed29db28c4314'/32
and direction=0
WARNING:dialog:dlg_onroute: dialog identification elements are
callid='DLGCH_e0JXVmd7Y2NiQ11dYXhjZX5CVkNhfWlneUlRXWIJIzEsXRAFfiV9NS4CVVkxZyU4YQMBBz1nMidhHgAa'/86,
caller tag='3832136123-1536789624'/21, callee
tag='2e31e1179f3440fca8aed29db28c4314'/32

But according to sngrep the ACK arrives with the correct Call-ID header:

Call-ID:
DLGCH_e0JXVmd7Y2NiQ11dYXhjZX5CVkNhfWlneUlRXWIJIzEsXRAFfiV9NS4CVVkxZyU4YQMBBz1nMidhHgAa

So I don't know which to believe at this point.

Mark.


On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 13:58, John Quick <john.quick at smartvox.co.uk> wrote:

> Mark,
>
> I wasn't using topology hiding, but had a problem similar to this which
> baffled me for a long time until I noticed that the To-tag value wasn't
> matching the value in the "200 OK". Looking at the DBG logs, it appears
> that
> the dialog matching uses To-tag and From-tag.
>
> Another idea - topology hiding puts a unique hash code into the Contact
> header. Is that getting altered by a downstream server?
>
> Compare the "200 OK" elements with the equivalent ACK elements. Hope this
> helps.
>
> John Quick
> Smartvox Limited
>
>
>

-- 
Mark Farmer
farmorg at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20210608/6905225a/attachment-0001.html>