[SR-Users] Switching form UDP to TCP causes authentication errors

Hello All, When I switched from UDP to TCP I started getting Authentication Errors, Asterisk responds to an INVITE via Kamailio with a '401 Unauthorized', but Kamailio does nothing with it. Processing just stops near WITH_BLOCK401407. Shouldn't the 401 be relayed so a new INVITE can be sent?

Re: [SR-Users] Performance Testing Kamailio 5.1 as SIP300 LCR on AWS - Recommendation on Tools and Methods

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:27:00PM +, KamDev Essa wrote: > I am assuming the function http_query in kamailio utils is async. Is it not?  It is not async, and is furthermore deprecated in 5.x. You may want to have a look at: https://kamailio.org/docs/modules/5.1.x/modules/http_client.html

Re: [SR-Users] Performance Testing Kamailio 5.1 as SIP300 LCR on AWS - Recommendation on Tools and Methods

I am assuming the function http_query in kamailio utils is async. Is it not?  KD On Thursday, May 24, 2018, 6:19:33 PM EDT, Alex Balashov wrote: On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:15:42PM +, KamDev Essa wrote: >    - Is http_query a bad choice for performance.

Re: [SR-Users] Performance Testing Kamailio 5.1 as SIP300 LCR on AWS - Recommendation on Tools and Methods

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:15:42PM +, KamDev Essa wrote: >- Is http_query a bad choice for performance. Is KEMI better? As long as you perform the queries in a properly asynchronous manner, i.e. using http_async_client, not necessarily. But yes, HTTP queries are by nature bureaucratic,

[SR-Users] Performance Testing Kamailio 5.1 as SIP300 LCR on AWS - Recommendation on Tools and Methods

I am currently setup with Kamailio 5.1 on an AWS t2.micro as a SIP300 LCR solution with a http_query call to an external resource (c# .NetCore app for LRN dip and MySQL Route choices) to get the contacts string, tag it to the Contact header an send 300.  Its been a while since I have

[SR-Users] Kamailio does not receive anything after exit route

Hi there, I've added a simple black list that rejects incoming requests (REGISTER and INVITE) containing certain text in the message body. Source IP addresses of the rejected requests are going to be banned and added to the ban list: route > { > ... > > > $var(ban_list_key) = $si + ":" +

Re: [SR-Users] SIP Server Hardware or VM ??

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:57:57PM +, Pinter, Gerd. wrote: > Thank you very much, this underpins my consideration. > How to tell my Boss :o Since I wasn't explicit in my reply: we are running rtpengine in vmware. The test I did bare metal vs. vmware was to confirm there is no problem with

Re: [SR-Users] SIP Server Hardware or VM ??

Am Mittwoch, 23. Mai 2018, 16:57:57 CEST schrieb Pinter, Gerd.: > Thank you very much, this underpins my consideration. > How to tell my Boss :o > > Nice Regards Hello Gerd, to help to convince your boss I would try to underline your thoughts with some measurements. Something like this: if