I don't have it in front of me, but it's definitely more than a few seconds. Anywhere from 5 to 30 minutes.
On August 8, 2018 1:20:22 PM EDT, Richard Fuchs <[email protected]> wrote: >On 2018-08-08 13:05, Alex Balashov wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 09:38:02AM -0400, Richard Fuchs wrote: >> >>> On 2018-08-08 09:25, Alex Balashov wrote: >>>> Richard, >>>> >>>> rtpproxy classic edition had an SDP attribute that could be >inserted to >>>> prevent rtpproxy from operating on the SDP if another rtpproxy had >>>> already been engaged upstream. Does RTPEngine have a similar >feature? >>>> >>> Yes, if you include the `loop-protect` option. >> Thanks! Are there any SDP interoperability concerns with using it? > >Not any more than what you would get with rtpproxy doing the same thing >:) > >> >> The other aspect of this that I am puzzling over is where the packets >in >> this loop are coming from. The call is long dead, the ports involved >are >> not in use (per the RTPEngine call list), but I'm still getting: >> >> Aug 08 12:50:00 gw1 rtpengine[18934]: ERR: >[[email protected] port 60368]: Too many packets in UDP >receive queue (more than 50), aborting loop. Dropped packets possible >> >> Are these RTP frames that were previously sent at some point during >the >> call looping? > >Hard to say without any further details. What does "long dead" mean >exactly? Seconds, minutes, hours? A deleted call disappears from the >call list immediately, but components of it (ports in particular) may >remain open for a short period of time until all reference counts drop >to zero. That should take only seconds at most though. > >_______________________________________________ >Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List >[email protected] >https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users -- Alex -- Sent via mobile, please forgive typos and brevity. _______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List [email protected] https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
