Hi Daniel Is there anything else you need on this?
On 26 April 2017 at 15:06, Pete Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Daniel > > It's CSeq 1, fromtag A1 > > DB attached > > On 26 April 2017 at 15:03, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Can you paste here the from tag or cseq for the dialog you are referring >> to? Because the number of frames are not matching my pcap viewer. >> >> Send also the db dump, they should reveal if something is broken there. >> >> Cheers, >> Daniel >> >> On 26.04.17 14:46, Pete Kelly wrote: >> >> Ah I see why it is confusing >> >> This setup maintains a Call-ID through an SBC downstream, so the INVITE's >> you see have the same Call-ID but they have a different fromtag/cseq, >> Wireshark shows them all as one call which is annoying when looking at the >> viewer! >> >> If you check the first call only between 252.70 and 252.75 you will see >> INVITE (frame 4), 200OK (frame 16) with lots of RR headers. >> >> The ACK generated by topos (frame 21) only contains 1 Route header, it >> should contain more so the request can hop through the proxy chain as shown >> in frame 16. >> >> I see the example from Sergey is working, but there is only 1 RR header >> in this example - as you can see from my example the topos module uses the >> first RR header but ignores the other 5. >> >> I have the DB dump and logfiles from this call too if useful. >> >> Pete >> >> >> On 26 April 2017 at 12:41, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> As I could notice upon a quick look, there seems to be two calls -- two >>> INVITE requests having same call id but different cseq. Can you confirm >>> this is the case? Because the capture doesn't seem to have all the >>> incoming/outgoing messages, some are missing. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Daniel >>> >>> On 26.04.17 12:59, Sergey Basov wrote: >>> > You give to us very hard callflow... >>> > >>> > Without any pauses between responces.. >>> > >>> > Some requests go through 127.0.0.1... But responces from 127.0.0.1 not >>> present. >>> > >>> > There are peers from which invites not present in dump. I can not see >>> > ful path of the initial Invite, but there is responses. >>> > >>> > I will send dump in next email directly. >>> > -- >>> > Best regards, >>> > Sergey Basov e-mail: [email protected] >>> > >>> > >>> > 2017-04-26 11:01 GMT+03:00 Pete Kelly <[email protected]>: >>> >> Attached is the pcap from latest nightly. >>> >> >>> >> As you can see (frame 21) the ACK is incorrect, I believe it should >>> specify >>> >> all the hops from the 200OK (frame 16) so that the hop by hop ACK can >>> be >>> >> routed via the proxy chain. >>> >> >>> >> topoh module works fine. >>> >> >>> >> Pete >>> >> >>> >> On 26 April 2017 at 05:18, Sergey Basov <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I dont know how nightly builds are done. >>> >>> >>> >>> Just try with latest 5.0.1 nightly and send new dump. >>> >>> >>> >>> As I understud topos module done to remove record-route headers to >>> hide >>> >>> topology... Am I wright, Daniel? >>> >>> >>> >>> And try to disable topos module and enable topoh module. Will it all >>> work >>> >>> as you expecrs? >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> WBR >>> >>> Sergey Basov >>> >>> >>> >>> 25 апр. 2017 г. 11:31 PM пользователь "Pete Kelly" <[email protected] >>> > >>> >>> написал: >>> >>> >>> >>>> I have tried with 5.0.1 from today (25th April). >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Are you saying build for 26th will have some fixes? >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On 25 April 2017 at 18:59, Sergey Basov <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> Actualy latest fixes to 180/183/200, ACK and memory leak was >>> pushed to >>> >>>>> 5.0 and master branch. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> So, please try with latest 5.0.1 nightly. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> -- >>> >>>>> WBR >>> >>>>> Sergey Basov >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> 25 апр. 2017 г. 8:55 PM пользователь "Pete Kelly" < >>> [email protected]> >>> >>>>> написал: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>>> Call is with sipp but first goes through another SBC to clean up >>> the >>> >>>>>> SIP (in case of problems with sipp via headers etc). >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> The traces I've done are actually with 4.4. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Will they be OK or would you prefer 5.0.1? The problem is exactly >>> the >>> >>>>>> same on both. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> On 25 April 2017 at 16:25, Sergey Basov <[email protected] >>> > >>> >>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>> Hi. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Can you send dump of the call with kamailio 5.0.1 nightly? >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> And does you make call using sipp? >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> -- >>> >>>>>>> WBR >>> >>>>>>> Sergey Basov >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> 25 апр. 2017 г. 5:57 PM пользователь "Pete Kelly" < >>> [email protected]> >>> >>>>>>> написал: >>> >>>>>>>> Looks like from last night: >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> 5.0.1+0~20170425013247.36+trusty >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> On 25 April 2017 at 15:42, Daniel-Constantin Mierla >>> >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> Hello, >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> to be sure, it is 5.0.1 build from last night or quite recent? >>> There >>> >>>>>>>>> were some fixes in the past days to topos module. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>> >>>>>>>>> Daniel >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> On 25.04.17 15:59, Pete Kelly wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Daniel >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Sorry for the delayed response to this, the ACK is for a 200OK >>> yes >>> >>>>>>>>> and the problem still persists in latest 4.4 and the 5.0.1 >>> nightly build. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> I have all DB entries/kam logs/pcap files. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> If you check the attached pcap, 192.168.70.70 and >>> 192.168.252.70 are >>> >>>>>>>>> the same instance of Kamailio, it is being used to bridge the >>> 2 networks. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Frame 34 shows the 200OK with lots of Record-Route etc, and >>> frame 35 >>> >>>>>>>>> shows topos in action. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> However the ACK that is relayed in Frame 38 seems to be >>> missing all >>> >>>>>>>>> the Route information that was supplied in the 200OK, this >>> causes the ACK to >>> >>>>>>>>> be relayed directly to the Contact, breaking the proxy chain. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Pete >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> On 22 February 2017 at 18:31, Daniel-Constantin Mierla >>> >>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>> Hello, >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> is the ACK for 200ok? Or an ack for a negative response? >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> Can you get a pcap for such situation with all messages >>> related to >>> >>>>>>>>>> the call? >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>> >>>>>>>>>> Daniel >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On 22/02/2017 17:20, Pete Kelly wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I am using the topos module when bridging 2 networks with >>> Kamailio. >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> The INVITE/200OK part of the transaction is working fine >>> (i.e. the >>> >>>>>>>>>> Contact on both sides matches correctly the corresponding >>> network). >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> However when the ACK is sent into Kamailio, instead of >>> realising >>> >>>>>>>>>> the next hop is myself and skipping it, Kamailio is sending >>> the ACK directly >>> >>>>>>>>>> to itself as a packet, causing the call setup to break. >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> Does anyone have any advice for this situation? >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>>>>>>>>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users >>> mailing >>> >>>>>>>>>> list >>> >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>> >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>> >>>>>>>>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla >>> >>>>>>>>>> www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda >>> >>>>>>>>>> Kamailio Advanced Training - Mar 6-8 (Europe) and Mar 20-22 >>> (USA) - >>> >>>>>>>>>> www.asipto.com >>> >>>>>>>>>> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - >>> www.kamailioworld.com >>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>> >>>>>>>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla >>> >>>>>>>>> www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda >>> >>>>>>>>> Kamailio Advanced Training - May 22-24 (USA) - www.asipto.com >>> >>>>>>>>> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - >>> www.kamailioworld.com >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>>>>>>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List >>> >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>> >>>>>>>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla >>> www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda >>> Kamailio Advanced Training - May 22-24 (USA) - www.asipto.com >>> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Daniel-Constantin Mierlawww.twitter.com/miconda -- >> www.linkedin.com/in/miconda >> Kamailio Advanced Training - May 22-24 (USA) - www.asipto.com >> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List [email protected] https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
