-LStill need to add
LIBS+=-L$(LOCALBASE)/lib -L$(ROCKETMQ_ROOT_PATH)/lib/linux/x64
-Wl,-rpath=$(ROCKETMQ_ROOT_PATH)/lib/linux/x64 crocketmq.o -lstdc++ -lrocketmq
__
Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions
To unsubscribe
LIBS This line can be modified LIBS+=-L$(LOCALBASE)/lib
-Wl,-rpath=$(ROCKETMQ_ROOT_PATH)/lib/linux/x64 crocketmq.o -lstdc++ -lrocketmq
This is actually okay
__
Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions
To unsubscribe send
Dear friends, I have a question: When adding a custom module in kamailio, I
referenced a third-party library. There was no problem with compilation, but
when I ran it, it reported that the third-party library could not be found.
What is the reason?
The current Makefile is as follows：
```
#
I don't think the anycast example is going to get you out of this problem
entirely.
> On 10 Oct 2023, at 17:22, Michel Pelletier via sr-users
> wrote:
>
> Many thanks. I am afraid I need stateful TM if only for the retransmissions
> and how to avoid them. The Anycast example will prove
Many thanks. I am afraid I need stateful TM if only for the
retransmissions and how to avoid them. The Anycast example will prove very
useful.
Cheers,
Michel Pelletier
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 11:58 AM Alex Balashov via sr-users <
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> wrote:
> But I should add: do you
Barry,
If I understand this correctly, it has the problem of creating two competing
sources of truth. I still think it would be better to rely on one XAVP held in
state.
—
Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
> On Oct 10, 2023, at 2:32 PM, Barry Flanagan wrote:
>
> 10 Oct
Hey James,
Thanks for your interest! Indeed this functionality is somewhat broken (in
the module), not very well documented and some of the documentation is not
actually correct, so let me explain some basics:
1. The rtpproxy notification mechanism is rather low-level, it has no
notion of
10 Oct 2023 19:24:55 Alex Balashov via sr-users :
> I would reiterate that in doing this, you may be boxing yourself into only
> supporting Q-value and $du as parameters, more or less.
>
> If that fits your design parameters, cool. However, if additional future
> route options are a
I would reiterate that in doing this, you may be boxing yourself into only
supporting Q-value and $du as parameters, more or less.
If that fits your design parameters, cool. However, if additional future route
options are a possibility, you'd be better off with a generic XAVP approach.
It's
10 Oct 2023 18:12:10 Ben Kaufman via sr-users :
> Probably better to use an xavp with the ruri as the key.
Yes, except ruri can be the same, with only the next hop proxy and q-value
changing :-(
I will work on adding a Param to ruri before append_branch containing the next
hop and deal with
But I should add: do you actually need state? All replies can be routed back
based on the content of SIP headers alone -- that is to say, statelessly. Most
simple load balancers remain stateless for this very reason.
> On 10 Oct 2023, at 13:09, Alex Balashov wrote:
>
> There is not.
>
>> On
You could look to an Anycast example of handling this type of situation:
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/blob/master/misc/examples/mixed/kamailio-minimal-anycast.cfg
Regards,
Fred Posner
p: +1 (352) 664-3733
> On Oct 10, 2023, at 1:09 PM, Alex Balashov via sr-users
> wrote:
>
> There
Probably better to use an xavp with the ruri as the key.
-Original Message-
From: Alex Balashov via sr-users
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 9:53 AM
To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
Cc: Alex Balashov
Subject: [SR-Users] Re: Serial Forking with differing next hop for each branch?
There is not.
> On 10 Oct 2023, at 12:50, Michel Pelletier via sr-users
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have 2 kamailio instances behind a load balancer. The problem I have is
> that the load balancer can only track TCP connections, but not UDP. So one
> Kamailio instance might send a request
Hi,
I have 2 kamailio instances behind a load balancer. The problem I have is
that the load balancer can only track TCP connections, but not UDP. So one
Kamailio instance might send a request using UDP, while the corresponding
UDP reply arrives on the other. This doesn't play well with the
> On 10 Oct 2023, at 10:17, Barry Flanagan via sr-users
> wrote:
>
> On 10/10/2023 15:09, Ben Kaufman wrote:
>> Would this work: use append_branch() in the request_route, then in your
>> failure route:
>>
>>
>>
>> $var(temp_ru) = $ru;
>> t_next_contacts();
>> $du = $ru;
>> $ru =
On 10/10/2023 15:09, Ben Kaufman wrote:
Would this work: use append_branch() in the request_route, then in your
failure route:
$var(temp_ru) = $ru;
t_next_contacts();
$du = $ru;
$ru = $var(temp_ru);
Unfortunately not, because the $du next hop can be different for each
branch, but $ru can
Oh. I thought Barry meant that he needed to turn priorities into q-values.
> On 10 Oct 2023, at 09:20, Ben Kaufman via sr-users
> wrote:
>
> append_branch() will automatically sort by q value.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Barry Flanagan via sr-users
> Sent: Tuesday, October
Would this work: use append_branch() in the request_route, then in your
failure route:
$var(temp_ru) = $ru;
t_next_contacts();
$du = $ru;
$ru = $var(temp_ru);
-Original Message-
From: Barry Flanagan
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 8:24 AM
To: Ben Kaufman ; Kamailio (SER) - Users
On 10/10/2023 14:20, Ben Kaufman wrote:
append_branch() will automatically sort by q value.
Yes, but I also need to specify a next hop, which append_branch does not
support. There does not appear to be any mechanism for defining both a
q-value and the d-uri. I can do one or the other but not
append_branch() will automatically sort by q value.
-Original Message-
From: Barry Flanagan via sr-users
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 5:15 AM
To: sr-users
Cc: Barry Flanagan
Subject: [SR-Users] Re: Serial Forking with differing next hop for each branch?
CAUTION: This email
On 10.10.23 12:15, Barry Flanagan via sr-users wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2023, at 18:55, Alex Balashov via sr-users wrote:
>>> On 6 Oct 2023, at 10:39, Barry Flanagan via sr-users
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/10/2023 15:23, Alex Balashov via sr-users wrote:
Hello,
If you can't key by
> On 10 Oct 2023, at 06:15, Barry Flanagan wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2023, at 18:55, Alex Balashov via sr-users wrote:
>>
>> Ah. Then the easiest approach is probably to buffer them into an XAVP
>> array and just iterate through them. R-URI can be one attribute of
>> each, while the
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023, at 18:55, Alex Balashov via sr-users wrote:
>> On 6 Oct 2023, at 10:39, Barry Flanagan via sr-users
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 06/10/2023 15:23, Alex Balashov via sr-users wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> If you can't key by R-URI, perhaps then just store a list of routes in a
>>>
Morning
What have you got your listen / advertise address / port set as?
See this link >
https://www.kamailio.org/wiki/cookbooks/5.5.x/core#advertised_address
I'd probably start by looking at that.
Lewis
Mission Labs Limited is registered in England, company number 10040088. Trading
Office:
Hello,
On 10.10.23 08:42, Ali Taher via sr-users wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I’m using Kamailio as SIP proxy to receive INVITE packets, randomize
> A-number and then relay it to a certain gateway.
>
>
>
> I noticed that a Via header is added to the INVITE sent by Kamailio to
> the gateway with
Hello,
I'm using Kamailio as SIP proxy to receive INVITE packets, randomize A-number
and then relay it to a certain gateway.
I noticed that a Via header is added to the INVITE sent by Kamailio to the
gateway with 0.0.0.0 as address as shown below:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
27 matches
Mail list logo
