Re: [SR-Users] Prepaid system using dialog and sqlops

What you're asking for is fairly complex. I think if you want step-by-step guidance or implementation, you're going to have to look to commercial consulting. On 08/05/2016 11:04 PM, Infinicalls Infinicalls wrote: Hi, Can somebody give a step by step tutorial on this. I am still not able to

Re: [SR-Users] Prepaid system using dialog and sqlops

Hi, Can somebody give a step by step tutorial on this. I am still not able to get it working. Thanks. regards Ganesh Kumar On 8/4/16, Infinicalls Infinicalls wrote: > Hi Daniel, > Thanks. I have added credits in Subscriber. But where exactly should > I insert the SQL

Re: [SR-Users] TCP message parsing & connection close issue

I'll also add: the initial INVITE is split. Wireshark shows its >= Layer 3 payload size to be 1497. There is a "Continuation" message displayed which contains the trailing SDP. So, it sounds like the problem is that the trailing segment is getting packed into the message buffer for the ACK.

Re: [SR-Users] TCP message parsing & connection close issue

I've also got a binary capture and would be happy to provide privately. On 08/05/2016 06:24 PM, Alex Balashov wrote: Hello, I've got an odd issue where: 1. TCP client makes call out through Kamailio. 2. Call is answered, TCP client sends e2e ACK. 3. Parser chokes on ACK, closes TCP

[SR-Users] TCP message parsing & connection close issue

Hello, I've got an odd issue where: 1. TCP client makes call out through Kamailio. 2. Call is answered, TCP client sends e2e ACK. 3. Parser chokes on ACK, closes TCP connection (SYN+FIN). 4. Subsequent messages from the client, immediately following the ACK (about 240 ms later), come

Re: [SR-Users] segfault when using sipt modifications

And I think you are wrong about last \x00 Look at attached screenshot, I think you does not have field that is highlighted "End of optional parameter" this must be last \x00 in string to get correct part with ISUP. -- Best regards, Sergey Basov e-mail: sergey.v.ba...@gmail.com

Re: [SR-Users] segfault when using sipt modifications

sorry correct function is isup_update_destination -- Best regards, Sergey Basov e-mail: sergey.v.ba...@gmail.com tel: (+38067) 403-62-54 2016-08-05 16:29 GMT+03:00 Sergey Basov : > You are welcome. > > > If you shure about last \x00 then you can

Re: [SR-Users] segfault when using sipt modifications

You are welcome. If you shure about last \x00 then you can try to edit modules/sipt/ss7_parser.c in function isup_update_bci_1 after strings // pointer to fixed part (2) offset++; add next // fixing Media requirements to speech 0x00 or 0x01 to 64k tmp_buf[0] = 0x00; tmp_buf[1] = 0x0A;

Re: [SR-Users] segfault when using sipt modifications

yes, that's x00 it's actually the only one well interpreted by kamailio :) thanks for the help in this issue Sergey El vie, 05-08-2016 a las 15:01 +0300, Sergey Basov escribió: > Hello. > > Most important, i think, is the las \x00 which is the flag end of ISUP > message... > Without it you

[SR-Users] e2e ACK. Kamailio. Cantact. Route.

Hello, I have this scheme: SIP Carrier (external IP 22.203) < > (local ip 1.21) mikrotik < > (local ip 1.21) Kamailio - (local ip 1.15) Asterisk. Carrier does not know what is Route header. that is why Carrier send ACK directly to 1.15 and fail. I change Contact at Kamailio to 1.21 then ACK

Re: [SR-Users] segfault when using sipt modifications

Hello. Most important, i think, is the las \x00 which is the flag end of ISUP message... Without it you cant generate correct ISUP part.. Look in wireshark. It will inform you about any error in ISUP. -- Best regards, Sergey Basov e-mail: sergey.v.ba...@gmail.com tel:

[SR-Users] e2e ACK

Hello, I have this scheme: SIP Carrier (external IP 22.203) < > (local ip 1.21) mikrotik < > (local ip 1.21) Kamailio - (local ip 1.15) Asterisk. Carrier does not know what is Route header. that is why Carrier send ACK directly to 1.15 and fail. I change Contact at Kamailio to 1.21 then ACK

Re: [SR-Users] Textops and Multipart Body - adding ISUP segfaults Kamailio

Hi. As I remember this INFO because after conversion to multipart your header in SIP message now Content-Type: multipart/mixed;boundary="2123894789_1257887457" not Content-Type: application/sdp and next WARNING is normal too in this case. For me it works normal, I make conversion from pure sip

Re: [SR-Users] Textops and Multipart Body - adding ISUP segfaults Kamailio

Hello all i'm having the same error on kam 4.4 when doing set_body_multipart(); msg_apply_changes(); i see in the logs 5(17797) DEBUG: textops [textops.c:1577]: set_multibody_helper(): delimiter<17>:[unique-boundary-1] 5(17797) DEBUG: textops [textops.c:1486]: generate_boundary(): adding

Re: [SR-Users] segfault when using sipt modifications

Hello that would be great, despite not needing it now, it would be great, there are 3 x00 in the isup i wanted to set, but 2 are from FCI and optional FCI, and the third is for the called party, which can be changed with sipt functions. anycase, the FCI could be an issue in some scenarios, so an

Re: [SR-Users] Kamailio on multiple interface

Hello, if you know the ip address associated with the network interfaces, you can use keyword dst_ip to check which of the ip addresses was used to receive the packet (or use $Ri instead of dst_ip). Cheers, Daniel On 05/08/16 08:41, Marino Mileti wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > I've my Kamailio

[SR-Users] Kamailio on multiple interface

Hi guys, I've my Kamailio box that works great J Now I would like to enable wifi on the board (in AP mode) in order to allow mobile devices to connect and receive and place calls. Is it possible? Is it possible to configure Kama like a "gateway" between two network cards? I've find a

Re: [SR-Users] Kamailio RTP Engine

Hello, I couldn't spot any rtpengine module function used inside the routing blocks. Look at default kamailio.cfg and see how rtpproxy_manage() is used -- you should use rtpengine_manage() instead. Cheers, Daniel On 04/08/16 16:09, Jack Stevens wrote: > > Hi Guys, > > > > Looking for some