Am Mittwoch, 21. März 2018, 17:35:17 CET schrieb hdssdsdsdsfsdf
hdssdsdsdsfsdf:
> I have kamailio setup that uses a mongo cluster, and everything works fine.
> Only I have problems with the avpops module. The avp_db_load fails with
> "field [attribute] not found in result iterator", even if the
My own fault
Because I needed to be able to forward the call to multiple GSM numbers
at the same voip provider, I split the call onto several instances of
Kamalio to be able to create new call id's
As a result, the registers were made on one instance, and the invites on
another. That
Hi all,
I have kamailio setup that uses a mongo cluster, and everything works fine.
Only I have problems with the avpops module. The avp_db_load fails with "field
[attribute] not found in result iterator", even if the attribute field is
present in the object in mongo. Does anybody know what
Hi all,
I have kamailio setup that uses a mongo cluster, and everything works fine.
Only I have problems with the avpops module. The avp_db_load fails with "field
[attribute] not found in result iterator", even if the attribute field is
present in the object in mongo. Does anybody know what
Just an update to my last email
.
I have increased the size to a higher value such as 90KB, but it
continues replying the msg -> "reply too big"
Thank you.
Best Regards
2018-03-21 11:20 GMT+00:00 José Seabra :
> Hello there,
> I have an htable with 3000 entries and
You could do something like below to check specifically for that case and
override the uac test.
if (sdp_get_line_startswith("$avp(cline)", "c="))
$var(sdp_contact_host) = $(avp(cline){re.subst,/c=IN IP4 (.+)/\1/});
if (is_in_subnet("$avp(sdp_contact_host)", "192.0.0.0/29"))
.
When receiving an INVITE over a specific LTE carrier, I'm seeing 'c=IN IP4
192.0.0.4' in SDP, which isn't technically a RFC1918 or RFC6598 IP address
and thus nat_uac_test(8) fails.
What elegant workaround can be done to catch such specific cases?
Thanks.
Thank you!
Indeed I had a problem with my config.
Arik
From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Reply-To:
Date: Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 16:30
To: arik halperin , "Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing
List"
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 03:17:36PM +0200, Zigelman, Amit wrote:
> How will the data look in the DB?
> Will it hold both entries pretty much the same with a difference is some
> fields such as the capture node?
There the capture node and timestamps will differ (node,date,micro_ts),
the rest is the
Check your config, maybe you have define conditions disabling the load
of dispatcher module.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21.03.18 15:04, arik halperin wrote:
>
> Dispatcher reload is indeed not in the list below.
>
>
>
>
>
> kamctl srv rpclist
>
> list server rpc commands
>
> {
>
> "jsonrpc":
Hello,
on the flight to Singapore for Fossasia, I got a bit of time to look at
it and the main issue was the documentation, it was no sync'ed with the
code -- the readme listed different attribute names.
In addition, I also found a bug on matching the pv name. Can someone
test with master branch
Dispatcher reload is indeed not in the list below.
kamctl srv rpclist
list server rpc commands
{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"result": [
"cfg.add_group_inst",
"cfg.commit",
"cfg.del",
"cfg.del_delayed",
"cfg.del_group_inst",
"cfg.diff",
"cfg.get",
Any help on this, guys?
ᐧ
Regards,
David Villasmil
email: david.villasmil.w...@gmail.com
phone: +34669448337
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:01 PM, David Villasmil <
david.villasmil.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> I'm trying to call an xmlrpc method with parameters like:
>
>
>
>
Hello,
can you give the output for next command?
kamctl srv rpclist
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21.03.18 14:57, arik halperin wrote:
>
> Yes, I did, same result.
>
>
>
> kamctl rpc dispatcher.reload
>
> {
>
> "jsonrpc": "2.0",
>
> "error": {
>
> "code": 500,
>
> "message": "Method Not
Yes, I did, same result.
kamctl rpc dispatcher.reload
{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"error": {
"code": 500,
"message": "Method Not Found"
},
"id": 31340
}
From: sr-users on behalf of Paulo
Ferreira
Hello
I have setup 2 gateways in my dr_rules: 5,6 - so the 2nd one is tried if
the first fails.
The second one requires credentials.
When the first one fails: I execute the following code:
failure_route[ROUTEFAIL] {
if ( t_check_status("[345][0-9][0-9]") or (t_branch_timeout() and
Hi,did you already tried the direct rpc command?
kamctl rpc dispatcher.reload
regards,Paulo
On Wed, 2018-03-21 at 12:21 +, Arik Halperin wrote:
> Hello,
> I’ve installed kamailio 5.1 but when I run:
>
> kamctl dispatcher reload
>
> I get:
>
> {
> "jsonrpc": "2.0",
> "error": {
>
Hi,
Thanks for the reply. Sorry for my late reply. I got things to work back then
so the problem is solved. It was mostly my mistake, but in case it helps anyone
in the future:
1 I needed to compile the mongocdriver with ssl: ./configure --enable-ssl
2 Not sure, but it might also have been
having trouble configuring kamalio to move calls between servers and
carriers
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
I am using Captagent on 2 sip servers communicating with each other.
Both Captagents then route the SIP traffic to the same Kamailio.
Therefore, if I understand, Kamailio will get every msg between them twice.
Once from server A and once from server B.
Let's say that each of them has a different
Hello,
I’ve installed kamailio 5.1 but when I run:
kamctl dispatcher reload
I get:
{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"error": {
"code": 500,
"message": "Method Not Found"
},
"id": 31222
}
How do I fix this?
Thanks,
Arik Halperin
___
Kamailio
George, I do see the same problem, though I haven't had time to investigate
yet. -A
On Monday, March 19, 2018 1:16:17 PM CDT George Diamantopoulos wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> It seems that the phonenum module in at least 5.1.2 (haven't tried previous
> versions) is behaving somewhat erratically.
Hello there,
I have an htable with 3000 entries and when i try dump the htable through
the command kamcmd htable.dump htable, this command returns "ERROR: reply
too big".
I have tried to increase the body size using the following modparam:
modparam("ctl", "binrpc_max_body_size",1024)
But the
Am Mittwoch, 21. März 2018, 08:10:39 CET schrieb Henning Westerholt:
> Am Dienstag, 20. März 2018, 17:40:26 CET schrieb Duarte Rocha:
> > I have a doubt about the flag 16 used in nat_uac_test() belonging to the
> > module NATDETECT.
> >
> > In the documentation, the following is stated :
> >
> >
Am Dienstag, 20. März 2018, 17:40:26 CET schrieb Duarte Rocha:
> I have a doubt about the flag 16 used in nat_uac_test() belonging to the
> module NATDETECT.
>
> In the documentation, the following is stated :
>
> *16* - Test if the source port is different from the port in the “Via”
> header
>
25 matches
Mail list logo