THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE, DO NOT REPLY. A new Flyspray task has been opened. Details are below.
User who did this - Andrew Pogrebennyk (marduk) Attached to Project - sip-router Summary - our Record-Route is doubled on subsequent branches Task Type - Bug Report Category - Module Status - Unconfirmed Assigned To - Operating System - All Severity - Low Priority - Normal Reported Version - Development Due in Version - Undecided Due Date - Undecided Details - I think I need some help understanding how the record_route() works. I have two kamailio instances running here, one on 127.0.0.1:5060 and another one which is the proxy on 127.0.0.1:5062, UAS on 127.0.0.1:5080. The proxy receives the INVITE which already has the RR of the lb instance on :5060 and sends it to the UAS, this is fine: Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16687]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:380]: print_rr_body(): current rr is <sip:127.0.0.1;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;ngcplb=yes;socket=udp:127.0.0.1:5060> Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16687]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:405]: print_rr_body(): skipping 0 route records Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16687]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:443]: print_rr_body(): out rr [<sip:127.0.0.1;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;ngcplb=yes;socket=udp:127.0.0.1:5060>] Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16687]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:444]: print_rr_body(): we have 1 records ... #### U 2014/09/08 16:32:04.179882 127.0.0.1:5062 -> 127.0.0.1:5080 INVITE sip:[email protected]:50604 SIP/2.0. Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1:5062;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;did=5ad.f301;mpd=ii;ice_caller=strip;ice_callee=strip;aset=50;rtpprx=yes;vsf=NHBnWA4TKgQiEwV5cQgZDg1NRXslXhM9PTE->. Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;ngcplb=yes;socket=udp:127.0.0.1:5060>. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.0.0.1:5062;branch=z9hG4bK9dda.7e4b118bbf12c6fc683081d44c680ec9.0. Route: <sip:[email protected];lr;socket=sip:127.0.0.1:5060>. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.0.0.1;branch=z9hG4bK9dda.c7a81cd777225e671c9471d1394c1865.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.126.0.1:50602;rport=50602;branch=z9hG4bK-17519-1-5. From: <sip:[email protected]>;tag=17519SIPpTag001. To: <sip:[email protected]>. Call-ID: [email protected]. CSeq: 2 INVITE. Contact: sip:[email protected]:50602. Max-Forwards: 9. Content-Type: application/sdp. Content-Length: 176. P-Caller-UUID: 074e2a60-4910-4123-88d4-31e2fb88323a. P-Callee-UUID: 9d655469-e443-48a0-beb3-3e6ddd774e22. P-Asserted-Identity: <sip:[email protected]>. P-Called-Party-ID: <sip:[email protected]>. P-App-Param: ;aleg_sst_enable=no;sst_enable=no. P-App-Name: sbc. P-NGCP-Caller-Info: <sip:[email protected]>;ip=127.126.0.1;port=50602. P-NGCP-Callee-Info: <sip:[email protected]>;ip=127.0.0.1;port=5060. P-D-Uri: sip:[email protected];lr;socket=sip:127.0.0.1:5060. . v=0. o=user1 53655765 2353687637 IN IP4 192.168.51.16. s=-. c=IN IP4 192.168.51.16. t=0 0. m=audio 30230 RTP/AVP 8. a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000. a=ptime:50. a=sendrecv. a=rtcp:30231. The UAS responds with a 404: # U 2014/09/08 16:32:04.183998 127.0.0.1:5080 -> 127.0.0.1:5062 SIP/2.0 404 Not Found. Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1:5062;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;did=5ad.f301;mpd=ii;ice_caller=strip;ice_callee=strip;aset=50;rtpprx=yes;vsf=NHBnWA4TKgQiEwV5cQgZDg1NRXslXhM9PTE->. Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;ngcplb=yes;socket=udp:127.0.0.1:5060>. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.0.0.1:5062;branch=z9hG4bK9dda.7e4b118bbf12c6fc683081d44c680ec9.0;received=127.0.0.1. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.0.0.1;branch=z9hG4bK9dda.c7a81cd777225e671c9471d1394c1865.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.126.0.1:50602;rport=50602;branch=z9hG4bK-17519-1-5. From: <sip:[email protected]>;tag=17519SIPpTag001. To: <sip:[email protected]>;tag=3B4CEA2F-540DBDE40002BFF2-AB22A700. Call-ID: [email protected]. CSeq: 2 INVITE. Content-Length: 0. after which we set an alternative destination and call append_branch(): Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16683]: NOTICE: <script>: Fallback from E164 number to user - R=sip:[email protected] [email protected] after that the proxy on :5062 sends the new INVITE to the UAS. This new INVITE has two record-routes belonging to the proxy: ### U 2014/09/08 16:32:04.271489 127.0.0.1:5062 -> 127.0.0.1:5080 INVITE sip:[email protected]:50604 SIP/2.0. Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1:5062;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;did=5ad.f301;mpd=ii;ice_caller=strip;ice_callee=strip;aset=50;rtpprx=yes;vsf=NHBnWA4TKgQiEwV5cQgZDg1NRXslXhM9PTE->. Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1:5062;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001>. Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;ngcplb=yes;socket=udp:127.0.0.1:5060>. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.0.0.1:5062;branch=z9hG4bK9dda.7e4b118bbf12c6fc683081d44c680ec9.1. Route: <sip:[email protected];lr;socket=sip:127.0.0.1:5060>. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.0.0.1;branch=z9hG4bK9dda.c7a81cd777225e671c9471d1394c1865.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.126.0.1:50602;rport=50602;branch=z9hG4bK-17519-1-5. From: <sip:[email protected]>;tag=17519SIPpTag001. To: <sip:[email protected]>. Call-ID: [email protected]. CSeq: 2 INVITE. Contact: sip:[email protected]:50602. Max-Forwards: 9. Content-Type: application/sdp. Content-Length: 176. P-Caller-UUID: 074e2a60-4910-4123-88d4-31e2fb88323a. P-Callee-UUID: 9d655469-e443-48a0-beb3-3e6ddd774e22. P-Asserted-Identity: <sip:[email protected]>. P-Called-Party-ID: <sip:[email protected]>. P-App-Param: ;aleg_sst_enable=no;sst_enable=no. P-App-Name: sbc. P-NGCP-Caller-Info: <sip:[email protected]>;ip=127.126.0.1;port=50602. P-NGCP-Callee-Info: <sip:[email protected]>;ip=127.0.0.1;port=5060. P-D-Uri: sip:[email protected];lr;socket=sip:127.0.0.1:5060. . v=0. o=user1 53655765 2353687637 IN IP4 192.168.51.16. s=-. c=IN IP4 192.168.51.16. t=0 0. m=audio 30230 RTP/AVP 8. a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000. a=ptime:50. a=sendrecv. a=rtcp:30231. ... Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16684]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:380]: print_rr_body(): current rr is <sip:127.0.0.1:5062;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;did=5ad.f301;mpd=ii;ice_caller=strip;ice_callee=strip;aset=50;rtpprx=yes;vsf=NHBnWA4TKgQiEwV5cQgZDg1NRXslXhM9PTE-> Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16684]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:380]: print_rr_body(): current rr is <sip:127.0.0.1:5062;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001> Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16684]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:380]: print_rr_body(): current rr is <sip:127.0.0.1;lr=on;ftag=17519SIPpTag001;ngcplb=yes;socket=udp:127.0.0.1:5060> Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16684]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:405]: print_rr_body(): skipping 3 route records Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16684]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:443]: print_rr_body(): out rr [] Sep 8 16:32:04 sp1 proxy[16684]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:444]: print_rr_body(): we have 3 records I know that this happens only if I call record_route after t_newtran(), if I create the transaction first it's all fine. But there are reasons why I prefer to do it the way it is. Questions: 1) Is this an incorrect usage or rr module? To me it seems like more a bug in kamailio, because if RR is kept on private memory it should be discarded after failure route, but if the RR persists it should not be added 2nd time. 2) Is there an easy way to check if the RR header has been already added? More information can be found at the following URL: http://sip-router.org/tracker/index.php?do=details&task_id=466 You are receiving this message because you have requested it from the Flyspray bugtracking system. If you did not expect this message or don't want to receive mails in future, you can change your notification settings at the URL shown above. _______________________________________________ sr-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
