[SR-Users] [Kamailio-Users] Rewrite $tU

Discussion:

Spinov Evgeniy

2011-02-11 13:51:45 UTC

Hello,

Hey,
I won't pretend to be an expert in Kamailio, someone will probably
suggest a better way. But here is how I rewrote my SIP packet's TO
# Rewrite RURI
avp_printf("$rU", "prefix_$rU");

$rU = "prefix_" + $rU;

# Remove existing header
remove_hf("To") ;
# Add new header which is copied from RURI
insert_hf("To: $ru\r\n", "From");
DISCLAIMER : Several threads have said that changing the TO header

a bad idea, so I only recommend using this as a last resort.

If devices are RFC3261 (SIP 2.0), then it is ok. If there are SIP 1.0
devices, then you have to preserve To/From header.
For the future, I would add options to change the From/To values via
pseudo-variables. It is the admin to decide to use it or not -- now
people need and do workarounds with subst or append_hf().
Cheers,
Daniel

I use Kamailio 3.0.3, and tried to use both of methods, i.e. insert_ft()
and reassigning pseudo variable $rU and all mentioned in this topic.
However, handle_subscribe() and dlg_manage() somewhy uses unmodified
packet.

Is there any workaround to handle $rU or $tU overwrites that for
pua_dialoginfo module?

I'm doing it like that:

$var(orig_uri) = $rU;
$rU = $(fU{re.subst,/(.*)_(.*)/\1/}) + "_" + $rU;
if (is_method("INVITE")) {
dlg_manage();
}
if (is_method("SUBSCRIBE")) {
handle_subscribe();
}
$rU = $var(orig_uri);

However, according to debug messages, NOTIFY's which are coming just
after INVITE are still without prefixes, but packets on Asterisk, which
is after Kamailio, are coming modified.

Please, advice.

David

Hey,
I do understand that normally the TO header should not be written, my
problem is that I am using the presence_dialoginfo module which uses

the

TO header and not the RURI, which means that in order to tell the
difference between customer A's extension 101 and Customer B's

extension

101, I rewrite the TO header to add context.
http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/users/2009-August/024316.html
Trouble is I have not had time to work on this since then.
Thanks,
David

Hey,
I need to rewrite the $tU variable on a packet before it is
relayed. It
is ok if the change is only on the relayed packet and the $tU
variable
change. The important thing is that I modify the To header, it

seems

that rewritting $tU would be the easiest.

$tU is not writable, but just readable.
If you want to change the "To" header you should do some "dirty"
replacing operation (see textops module).

This is propably something we need to change and make the To and
From headers writable.
It's not dirty to change them any more.
David: In the original SIP 1.0 protocol the To/From headers was

part

of the dialog identification, thus you where not allowed to change
them in a proxy. THis was kept in RFC3261 - sip v2 - but has been
removed in an additional RFC a short while ago (seen from SIP

history).

Regards,
/O
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list
Users at lists.kamailio.org
http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________
Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list
Users at lists.kamailio.org
http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
* http://www.asipto.com/

Klaus Darilion

2011-02-11 18:45:39 UTC

Permalink

Post by Spinov Evgeniy

Hello,

Hey,
I won't pretend to be an expert in Kamailio, someone will probably
suggest a better way. But here is how I rewrote my SIP packet's TO
# Rewrite RURI
avp_printf("$rU", "prefix_$rU");

$rU = "prefix_" + $rU;

# Remove existing header
remove_hf("To") ;
# Add new header which is copied from RURI
insert_hf("To: $ru\r\n", "From");
DISCLAIMER : Several threads have said that changing the TO header

a bad idea, so I only recommend using this as a last resort.

Yes, most functions do not see message manipulation as the manipulations
are applied just before sending out the message again. So the changes
are applied after the functions.

Workaround 1: loop the message to Kamailio again

Workaround 2: Since Kamailio 3.1 you can use msg_apply_changes():
http://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/3.1.x/modules/textopsx.html#msg_apply_changes

But note, this causes the message to be changed and reparsed, thus it
may be a performance killer (double processing time for message parsing)

klaus

Post by Spinov Evgeniy
Is there any workaround to handle $rU or $tU overwrites that for
pua_dialoginfo module?
$var(orig_uri) = $rU;
$rU = $(fU{re.subst,/(.*)_(.*)/\1/}) + "_" + $rU;
if (is_method("INVITE")) {
dlg_manage();
}
if (is_method("SUBSCRIBE")) {
handle_subscribe();
}
$rU = $var(orig_uri);
However, according to debug messages, NOTIFY's which are coming just
after INVITE are still without prefixes, but packets on Asterisk, which
is after Kamailio, are coming modified.
Please, advice.

David

Hey,
I do understand that normally the TO header should not be written, my
problem is that I am using the presence_dialoginfo module which uses

the

TO header and not the RURI, which means that in order to tell the
difference between customer A's extension 101 and Customer B's

extension

101, I rewrite the TO header to add context.
http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/users/2009-August/024316.html
Trouble is I have not had time to work on this since then.
Thanks,
David

seems

that rewritting $tU would be the easiest.

$tU is not writable, but just readable.
If you want to change the "To" header you should do some "dirty"
replacing operation (see textops module).

This is propably something we need to change and make the To and
From headers writable.
It's not dirty to change them any more.
David: In the original SIP 1.0 protocol the To/From headers was

part

of the dialog identification, thus you where not allowed to change
them in a proxy. THis was kept in RFC3261 - sip v2 - but has been
removed in an additional RFC a short while ago (seen from SIP

history).

Spinov Evgeniy

2011-03-23 13:52:12 UTC

Permalink

Hi,

I've installed, as you advised Kamailio 3.1.2 and used
msg_apply_changes(). However, even when I'm not changing anything in the
packet and just calling msg_apply_changes() I get errors from K:

7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:859]: FIXME: lumps_len called with
null send_sock
7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:1340]: FIXME: process_lumps: null
bind_address
7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket

when function is not used - everything runs fine. However I need to
modify the message.

Please, advice.

Daniel-Constantin Mierla

2011-03-23 14:16:20 UTC

Permalink

Hello,

I have to look into the sources and doubel check, but the log messages
seem to be harmless.

For the moment, you can just set a flag when you change something in the
message and then call msg_apply_changes() only when the flag is set, e.g.,

remove_hf("From");
setflag(20);

...

if(isflagset(20))
msg_apply_changes();

However, I will update the sources so such log messages will not appear
unless they are necessary.

Thanks,
Daniel

Post by Spinov Evgeniy
Hi,
I've installed, as you advised Kamailio 3.1.2 and used
msg_apply_changes(). However, even when I'm not changing anything in the
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:859]: FIXME: lumps_len called with
null send_sock
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:1340]: FIXME: process_lumps: null
bind_address
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
7(31755) :<core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
when function is not used - everything runs fine. However I need to
modify the message.
Please, advice.

--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com

Spinov Evgeniy

2011-03-24 05:48:48 UTC

Permalink

On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 15:16 +0100, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:

Well, unfortunately no. When I use msg_apply_changes() and I see this
messages, signalization doesn't work fine. Actually call is not being
established - it's just getting timeouts from K and failure routes are
being executed.

As function is removed - everything runs good and calls are passing
fine.

Hello,
I have to look into the sources and doubel check, but the log messages
seem to be harmless.
For the moment, you can just set a flag when you change something in the
message and then call msg_apply_changes() only when the flag is set, e.g.,
remove_hf("From");
setflag(20);
...
if(isflagset(20))
msg_apply_changes();
However, I will update the sources so such log messages will not appear
unless they are necessary.
Thanks,
Daniel

Daniel-Constantin Mierla

2011-03-24 06:42:40 UTC

Permalink

Hello,

if you watch the SIP traffic with ngrep, do you see the message sent out?

Can you reproduce this case easily? If yes, can you start kamailio with
extra parameters '-E -ddd' and send here all the debug messages printed
for such case, from the moment the SIP request is received.

Cheers,
Daniel

Post by Spinov Evgeniy
Well, unfortunately no. When I use msg_apply_changes() and I see this
messages, signalization doesn't work fine. Actually call is not being
established - it's just getting timeouts from K and failure routes are
being executed.
As function is removed - everything runs good and calls are passing
fine.

Hello,
I have to look into the sources and doubel check, but the log messages
seem to be harmless.
For the moment, you can just set a flag when you change something in the
message and then call msg_apply_changes() only when the flag is set, e.g.,
remove_hf("From");
setflag(20);
...
if(isflagset(20))
msg_apply_changes();
However, I will update the sources so such log messages will not appear
unless they are necessary.
Thanks,
Daniel

_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com

Spinov Evgeniy

2011-03-24 07:25:58 UTC

Permalink

Hello,
if you watch the SIP traffic with ngrep, do you see the message sent out?

First of all I would like to thank you your time devoted to this
problem.

To not flood mail with long text, I've written it in short, without
fulldumps.

Messages are sent, however, for some reason Record-Route header look
like this:

Record-Route: <sip:;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=323895591>
Record-Route: <sip:KAMAILIO_IP;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=323895591>

i.e. first header is empty? I've called this header invalid in the rest
of the text.

Via header and rest of the packet looks good.

First part of exchange looks like this. Let's assume that I'm calling
from 100 to 101:

Kamailio <-> Asterisk

INVITE 100 -> 101 ( header is invalid )
<- 100 Trying ( header is invalid )
<- INVITE 101
100 Trying ->
180 Ringing ( header is invalid )->

At this stage 101 rings, however 100 is not getting "waiting" tone.

After call reply at 101:

OK 101 -> 100
101 <- ACK 100 ( header is invalid )
OK 101 -> 100
100 <- OK 101, header is invalid )
OK ( from 101 ) -> 100
100 <- OK ( from 101, header is invalid )

etc....
Looks like message is not being delivered correctly.

Can you reproduce this case easily? If yes, can you start kamailio with
extra parameters '-E -ddd' and send here all the debug messages printed
for such case, from the moment the SIP request is received.

While on Kamailio side in debug messages I have error regarding failure
of resolution host IP ";r2=on" from the SIP header.

So it seems, that Record-Router header is doing the mess.

Without msg_apply_changes() invalid Record route header just do not
appear.

If I've provided you not enough info to find out the reason, I can do
the full dumps, as problem is easily repeated.

Thank you.

Cheers,
Daniel

Hello,
I have to look into the sources and doubel check, but the log messages
seem to be harmless.
For the moment, you can just set a flag when you change something in the
message and then call msg_apply_changes() only when the flag is set, e.g.,
remove_hf("From");
setflag(20);
...
if(isflagset(20))
msg_apply_changes();
However, I will update the sources so such log messages will not appear
unless they are necessary.
Thanks,
Daniel

_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

Daniel-Constantin Mierla

2011-03-24 13:14:43 UTC

Permalink

Are you calling msg apply changes after record_route()? Try to do
record_route() after since it tries to discover the outgoing local
interface which might not be set at that point.

Btw, is Kamailio bridging between two networks?

The output with '-E -ddd' will be helpful anyhow.

Cheers,
Daniel

Post by Spinov Evgeniy

Hello,
if you watch the SIP traffic with ngrep, do you see the message sent out?

First of all I would like to thank you your time devoted to this
problem.
To not flood mail with long text, I've written it in short, without
fulldumps.
Messages are sent, however, for some reason Record-Route header look
Record-Route:<sip:;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=323895591>
Record-Route:<sip:KAMAILIO_IP;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=323895591>
i.e. first header is empty? I've called this header invalid in the rest
of the text.
Via header and rest of the packet looks good.
First part of exchange looks like this. Let's assume that I'm calling
Kamailio<-> Asterisk
INVITE 100 -> 101 ( header is invalid )
<- 100 Trying ( header is invalid )
<- INVITE 101
100 Trying ->
180 Ringing ( header is invalid )->
At this stage 101 rings, however 100 is not getting "waiting" tone.
OK 101 -> 100
101 <- ACK 100 ( header is invalid )
OK 101 -> 100
100 <- OK 101, header is invalid )
OK ( from 101 ) -> 100
100 <- OK ( from 101, header is invalid )
etc....
Looks like message is not being delivered correctly.

While on Kamailio side in debug messages I have error regarding failure
of resolution host IP ";r2=on" from the SIP header.
So it seems, that Record-Router header is doing the mess.
Without msg_apply_changes() invalid Record route header just do not
appear.
If I've provided you not enough info to find out the reason, I can do
the full dumps, as problem is easily repeated.
Thank you.

Cheers,
Daniel

Hello,
I have to look into the sources and doubel check, but the log messages
seem to be harmless.
For the moment, you can just set a flag when you change something in the
message and then call msg_apply_changes() only when the flag is set, e.g.,
remove_hf("From");
setflag(20);
...
if(isflagset(20))
msg_apply_changes();
However, I will update the sources so such log messages will not appear
unless they are necessary.
Thanks,
Daniel

_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com

Spinov Evgeniy

2011-03-25 12:30:00 UTC

Permalink

Post by Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Are you calling msg apply changes after record_route()? Try to do
record_route() after since it tries to discover the outgoing local
interface which might not be set at that point.

This has fixed the problem.

Also I'm wondering how exactly mechanics of reparsing works?

1. Message has been changed. By the way, can I change the $rU and $tU
variables and then use msg_apply_changes()? Will it work or I can work
only with adding/removing headers from the packet?

2. Function msg_apply_changes() is used, just like
msg_apply_changes();

Question is execution of script will continue just after this call with
reparsed packet or will run the script again? Debug shows that will
continue from that point, but I'm unsure that I'm working with reparsed
packet.

Can you clearify this?

Thank you.

Post by Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Btw, is Kamailio bridging between two networks?
The output with '-E -ddd' will be helpful anyho

6(28419) NOTICE: <script>: [Fri Mar 25 12:09:43 2011] SUBSCRIBE
Authorized 17_100 -> 0
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [socket_info.c:501]: grep_sock_info - checking
if host==us: 14==9 && [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] == [127.0.0.1]
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [socket_info.c:504]: grep_sock_info - checking
if port 5060 matches port 5060
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [socket_info.c:501]: grep_sock_info - checking
if host==us: 14==14 && [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] == [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [socket_info.c:504]: grep_sock_info - checking
if port 5060 matches port 5060
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1379]: DEBUG: t_newtran: msg id=2 ,
global msg id=2 , T on entrance=(nil)
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:528]: t_lookup_request: start searching:
hash=19412, isACK=0
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:485]: DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction
matching failed
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:711]: DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no
transaction found
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_hooks.c:374]: DBG: trans=0xb6153c00, callback
type 1, id 0 entered
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_hooks.c:374]: DBG: trans=0xb6153c00, callback
type 1, id 0 entered
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [re.c:454]: subst_run: running. r=1
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [re.c:523]: subst_str: no match
6(28419) DEBUG: textops [txt_var.c:69]: no match for subst expression
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [re.c:454]: subst_run: running. r=0
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [re.c:475]: subst_run: matched (0, 6): [17_100]
6(28419) NOTICE: <script>: [Fri Mar 25 12:09:43 2011] Prepending number
with customer ID: 0 -> 17_0
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [re.c:454]: subst_run: running. r=0
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [re.c:475]: subst_run: matched (0, 6): [17_100]
6(28419) NOTICE: <script>: [Fri Mar 25 12:09:43 2011] Converted request
URI to: 17_0
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:859]: FIXME: lumps_len called with
null send_sock
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:1340]: FIXME: process_lumps: null
bind_address
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
6(28419) : <core> [msg_translator.c:519]: ERROR: lump_check_opt: null
send socket
6(28419) DEBUG: textopsx [textopsx.c:140]: SIP Request content updated
- reparsing
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:630]: SIP Request:
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:632]: method: <SUBSCRIBE>
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:634]: uri:
<sip:***@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:636]: version: <SIP/2.0>
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_via.c:1287]: Found param type 232,
<branch> = <z9hG4bK307388744>; state=16
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_via.c:2300]: end of header
reached, state=5
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:515]: parse_headers: Via
found, flags=2
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:517]: parse_headers: this
is the first via
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_to.c:803]: end of header reached,
state=10
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:187]: DEBUG: get_hdr_field:
<To> [24]; uri=[sip:***@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:189]: DEBUG: to body
[<sip:***@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>
]
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:167]: get_hdr_field: cseq
<CSeq>: <3> <SUBSCRIBE>
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:201]: DEBUG: get_hdr_body :
content_length=0
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:103]: found end of header
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [event_list.c:354]: start event= [dialog/5]
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [subscribe.c:773]: 'Expires' header found,
value= 60
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [subscribe.c:795]: 'To' header ALREADY PARSED:
<sip:***@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [subscribe.c:834]: 'From' header not parsed
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_to.c:174]: DEBUG: add_param:
tag=123926587
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_to.c:803]: end of header reached,
state=29
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [subscribe.c:864]: generating to_tag
6(28419) DEBUG: sl [sl.c:327]: totag stateful mode (tm)
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [subscribe.c:918]: subs->contact=
sip:***@91.72.15.26:1081 - len = 27
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser_helpers.c:104]: current rr is
<sip:;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=123926587>
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser_helpers.c:104]: current rr is
<sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=123926587>
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser_helpers.c:167]: out rr
[<sip:;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=123926587>,<sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=123926587>]
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [parser_helpers.c:168]: we have 2 records
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [subscribe.c:682]: subscription status= active
- found in watcher table
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [notify.c:122]:
[pres_uri]= sip:***@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
[to_user]= 0 [to_domain]= xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
[w_user]= 17_100 [w_domain]= xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
[event]= dialog
[status]= active
[expires]= 60
[callid]= ***@176.249.0.2 [local_cseq]=0
[to_tag]= a6a1c5f60faecf035a1ae5b6e96e979a-6003 [from_tag]= 123926587
[contact]= sip:***@91.72.15.26:1081 [record_route]=
<sip:;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=123926587>,<sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=123926587>
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1081]: DEBUG: t_check_msg: msg id=2
global id=2 T start=0xb6153c00
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1153]: DEBUG: t_check_msg: T already
found!
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [msg_translator.c:204]:
check_via_address(91.72.15.26, yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy, 0)
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [mem/shm_mem.c:105]: WARNING:vqm_resize:
resize(0) called
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:1470]: DEBUG: cleanup_uac_timers: RETR/FR
timers reset
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:659]: DEBUG: reply sent out.
buf=0x834f5dc: SIP/2.0 202 OK
Reco..., shmem=0xb6155c8c: SIP/2.0 202 OK
Reco
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:669]: DEBUG: _reply_light: finished
6(28419) DEBUG: sl [sl.c:273]: reply in stateful mode (tm)
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [notify.c:1461]: dialog info:
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [notify.c:122]:
[pres_uri]= sip:***@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
[to_user]= 0 [to_domain]= xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
[w_user]= 17_100 [w_domain]= xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
[event]= dialog
[status]= active
[expires]= 60
[callid]= ***@176.249.0.2 [local_cseq]=0
[to_tag]= a6a1c5f60faecf035a1ae5b6e96e979a-6003 [from_tag]= 123926587
[contact]= sip:***@yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy:1081 [record_route]=
<sip:;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=123926587>,<sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=123926587>
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [hash.c:471]: pres_uri=
sip:***@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [notify.c:643]: No record exists in hash_table
6(28419) DEBUG: presence_dialoginfo [notify_body.c:67]:
[pres_user]=17_0 [pres_domain]= xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx, [n]=0
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [notify.c:1515]: Could not get the notify_body
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [notify.c:234]: expires = 60
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [notify.c:1555]: headers:
Max-Forwards: 70
Event: dialog
Contact: <sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060>
Subscription-State: active;expires=70

6(28419) DEBUG: presence [notify.c:940]: CONTACT =
sip:***@yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy:1081
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [socket_info.c:501]: grep_sock_info - checking
if host==us: 14==9 && [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] == [127.0.0.1]
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [socket_info.c:504]: grep_sock_info - checking
if port 5060 matches port 5060
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [socket_info.c:501]: grep_sock_info - checking
if host==us: 14==14 && [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] == [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [socket_info.c:504]: grep_sock_info - checking
if port 5060 matches port 5060
6(28419) DEBUG: presence [notify.c:1729]: === 23/6/37
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [uac.c:240]: DEBUG:tm:t_uac:
next_hop=<sip:;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=123926587>
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:567]:
dns_hash_find(_sip._udp.;r2=on(16), 33), h=399
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:567]: dns_hash_find(;r2=on(6), 1),
h=1013
6(28419) ERROR: <core> [resolve.c:1540]: ERROR: sip_hostport2su: could
not resolve hostname: ";r2=on"
6(28419) ERROR: tm [ut.h:318]: failed to resolve ";r2=on"
6(28419) ERROR: tm [uac.c:263]: t_uac: no socket found
6(28419) ERROR: presence [notify.c:1577]: in function
tmb.t_request_within
6(28419) ERROR: presence [notify.c:1673]: sending Notify not successful
6(28419) ERROR: presence [subscribe.c:428]: Could not send notify
6(28419) ERROR: presence [subscribe.c:454]: occured
6(28419) ERROR: presence [subscribe.c:686]: in update_subscription
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1081]: DEBUG: t_check_msg: msg id=2
global id=2 T start=0xb6153c00
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1153]: DEBUG: t_check_msg: T already
found!
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:1470]: DEBUG: cleanup_uac_timers: RETR/FR
timers reset
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [timer.c:595]: timer_add called on an active
timer 0xb6153c48 (0xb5fd5bac, 0xb5fd5bac), flags 201
6(28419) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:184]: tm: put_on_wait: transaction
0xb6153c00 already on wait
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:646]: DEBUG:destroy_avp_list:
destroying list (nil)
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:646]: DEBUG:destroy_avp_list:
destroying list (nil)
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:646]: DEBUG:destroy_avp_list:
destroying list (nil)
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:646]: DEBUG:destroy_avp_list:
destroying list (nil)
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:646]: DEBUG:destroy_avp_list:
destroying list (nil)
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:646]: DEBUG:destroy_avp_list:
destroying list (nil)
6(28419) DEBUG: <core> [receive.c:289]: receive_msg: cleaning up

Post by Daniel-Constantin Mierla
w.
Cheers,
Daniel

Post by Spinov Evgeniy

Hello,
if you watch the SIP traffic with ngrep, do you see the message sent out?

First of all I would like to thank you your time devoted to this
problem.
To not flood mail with long text, I've written it in short, without
fulldumps.
Messages are sent, however, for some reason Record-Route header look
Record-Route:<sip:;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=323895591>
Record-Route:<sip:KAMAILIO_IP;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=323895591>
i.e. first header is empty? I've called this header invalid in the rest
of the text.
Via header and rest of the packet looks good.
First part of exchange looks like this. Let's assume that I'm calling
Kamailio<-> Asterisk
INVITE 100 -> 101 ( header is invalid )
<- 100 Trying ( header is invalid )
<- INVITE 101
100 Trying ->
180 Ringing ( header is invalid )->
At this stage 101 rings, however 100 is not getting "waiting" tone.
OK 101 -> 100
101 <- ACK 100 ( header is invalid )
OK 101 -> 100
100 <- OK 101, header is invalid )
OK ( from 101 ) -> 100
100 <- OK ( from 101, header is invalid )
etc....
Looks like message is not being delivered correctly.

While on Kamailio side in debug messages I have error regarding failure
of resolution host IP ";r2=on" from the SIP header.
So it seems, that Record-Router header is doing the mess.
Without msg_apply_changes() invalid Record route header just do not
appear.
If I've provided you not enough info to find out the reason, I can do
the full dumps, as problem is easily repeated.
Thank you.

Cheers,
Daniel

Hello,
I have to look into the sources and doubel check, but the log messages
seem to be harmless.
For the moment, you can just set a flag when you change something in the
message and then call msg_apply_changes() only when the flag is set, e.g.,
remove_hf("From");
setflag(20);
...
if(isflagset(20))
msg_apply_changes();
However, I will update the sources so such log messages will not appear
unless they are necessary.
Thanks,
Daniel

_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

Klaus Darilion

2011-03-25 14:07:09 UTC

Permalink

Post by Spinov Evgeniy
Question is execution of script will continue just after this call with
reparsed packet or will run the script again? Debug shows that will
continue from that point, but I'm unsure that I'm working with reparsed
packet.

AFAIK it continues. Just log $mb before and after msg_apply_changes();

regards
Klaus

Spinov Evgeniy

2011-03-27 08:33:41 UTC

Permalink

Looking good. I've rewrited variables and it parses well. Script
continues to run just after call of msg_apply_changes().

Continue reading on narkive:

Search results for '[SR-Users] [Kamailio-Users] Rewrite $tU' (Questions and Answers)

replies

Do you think the U.S. constitution needs to be rewritten for modern society?

started 2007-09-26 14:31:51 UTC

law & ethics

replies