Tony,

Yikes, seems like you've had a rough go.  Thanks for the tips.  I'll test
through those over the coming days and report back.


- Jeff



On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Tony Graziano <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Some might argue it "should" work this way too (as in how it works now),
> since the first user does not have the security to send the call where the
> second user does...
>
> You might be sure to test attended transfers and directed call pickups.
> That's where they failed before.  They have gotten better since they
> finally added REFER support, but you might also want to test park retrieve
> and park call return too. Post back on what they choke on if you would be
> so kind.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jeff Pyle <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Michael,
>>
>> I have a number of TA900-series Adtrans on my network, and I'm familiar
>> with most of the ins and outs of their configuration.  You're right,
>> they're not perfect, but I've become quite satisfied with them.  I'm
>> curious what issues you've encountered.
>>
>> In this particular sipX test scenario, I have a single Adtran gateway
>> configured in sipX as an "Unmanaged gateway".  All the signaling everywhere
>> in the system is private; no NAT or public traffic exists.  This is not a
>> "SIP Trunking" issue as sipX defines it because I don't have a "SIP Trunk"
>> defined with sipXbridge.
>>
>> Regardless, the signaling for the outbound leg of the call doesn't make
>> it out of sipXproxy towards the Adtran in the failing scenarios.  Captures
>> have shown sipXproxy denies it with a "403 Requires" rejection.  Joegen has
>> said this is because of a long-standing 302 bug where permissions are not
>> inherited correctly.  The provider/gateway is irrelevant because the call
>> is dropped within sipX before it even tries to contact the
>> provider/gateway.  Even if I were to light up a trunk with voip.ms as
>> Todd suggests and configure it with sipXbridge, in this scenario sipXproxy
>> would reject the call before it got to sipXbridge (tested), and certainly
>> before it got to voip.ms.
>>
>> Summarizing Joegen's explanation, the call is denied because of a
>> permissions problem.  What if I were to edit the Local dial plan to change
>> the permission requirement from the default "Local Dialing" to "None"?
>>  That way an unauthenticated user (with no permissions), including an
>> external gateway, should be able to send a call through the matching dial
>> plan.
>>
>> And it worked!  I could call the user with the call forward from a user
>> without the Local permission, and the forward executed correctly.  Same
>> thing from an external call routing in through the PRI.  Good stuff.
>>
>> Clearly there's a security issue leaving it like this.  I look forward to
>> the day when the 302/permissions problem is resolved.  Thanks to everyone
>> for your thoughts and suggestions.  And if anyone has other thoughts about
>> how to work around the 302 problem in a more secure way, I'd love to hear
>> it.
>>
>>
>> - Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Michael Picher <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Well, those adtrans are known to have some SIP issues in working with
>>> our platform...
>>>
>>> Josh can speak up but we've tested them every so often and from what I
>>> know from about 4 months ago they still hadn't ironed out all of the
>>> signalling issues they have.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Todd Hodgen <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> That feature works today, as AFAIK, has worked for years.   Incoming
>>>> calls to an extension, can have forwarding set to ring at the same time, or
>>>> at the end of a timed period.  There is no magic to that, the feature just
>>>> works.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Something in your particular setup is keeping that from working.  ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Don’t want to sound like a broken record, but try using another group
>>>> of trunks – for example, order some VOIP.ms trunks, which are very low
>>>> cost, and get them working.   It will give you a known working scenario to
>>>> test from, and give you some call details to do stare and compare with to
>>>> see what might be your issue.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>>>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jeff Pyle
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 20, 2012 5:50 AM
>>>> *To:* Joegen Baclor
>>>> *Cc:* Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
>>>>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Call forward fails to external number****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Is there a workaround to allow a user to forward externally sourced
>>>> calls to external numbers?  Perhaps by disabling a permission requirement
>>>> somehow?****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> - Jeff****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Joegen Baclor <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> This is a long standing issue and is all about 302 redirects not able
>>>> to grant permissions of the called number to the caller.  On top of this,
>>>> branches will also be enforced if you have set one.  The caller will not
>>>> inherent the branch where the callee is located.****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 09/20/2012 10:04 AM, Jeff Pyle wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM, George Niculae <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote: ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> It's not about tailing logs only but it also captures other config
>>>> from your system. However in your case tailing proxy and reg logsand
>>>> post them back here would suffice.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> The proxy and registrar logs are attached.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> User 1821 is set to ring for 4 seconds, then forward to 2169311212.
>>>>  User 1821 can call 2169311212 with no problem (has Local permission).*
>>>> ***
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> In this test, User 4821 called user 1821, but since User 4821 does not
>>>> have the Local permission, the call went to 1821's VM box instead of to
>>>> 2169311212.  If I re-enable Local permission for 4821, the call
>>>> forward on 1821 succeeds.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> - Jeff****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________****
>>>>
>>>> sipx-users mailing list****
>>>>
>>>> [email protected]****
>>>>
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Picher, Director of Technical Services
>>> eZuce, Inc.
>>>
>>> 300 Brickstone Square****
>>>
>>> Suite 201****
>>>
>>> Andover, MA. 01810
>>> O.978-296-1005 X2015
>>> M.207-956-0262
>>> @mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher>
>>> linkedin <http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=35504760&trk=tab_pro>
>>> www.ezuce.com
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary
>>> and those who don't.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Tony Graziano, Manager
> Telephone: 434.984.8430
> sip: [email protected]
> Fax: 434.465.6833
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Linked-In Profile:
> http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4
> Ask about our Internet Fax services!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Using or developing for sipXecs from SIPFoundry? Ask me about sipX-CoLab
> 2013!
>  <http://sipxcolab2013.eventbrite.com/?discount=tony2013>
>
>
> LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
> Telephone: 434.984.8426
> sip: [email protected].**net<[email protected]>
>
> Helpdesk Customers: 
> http://myhelp.myitdepartment.**net<http://myhelp.myitdepartment.net>
> Blog: http://blog.myitdepartment.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

Reply via email to