Hello, when you look at the network traffic 9e.g., with ngrep, sngrep, ...) what is shown as source address for outbound leg?
Cheers, Daniel On 08.07.19 19:21, Leonid Fainshtein wrote: > I just found Daniel's response to a similar question (ref.: > https://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/2019-February/104853.html): > > "check the routing rules/table of the operating systems, there should be > some differences between the two servers. > If you mhomed=1 and an unexpected interface is used for routing out the > traffic, it means that the operating system has internal routing rules that > allow going from that interface to the target address." > > Don't see anything suspicious in my server routing table: > > default via 192.168.0.1 dev eno1 proto static > 10.159.65.0/24 dev lxdbr0 proto kernel scope link src 10.159.65.1 > 172.200.4.0/24 dev eno1 proto kernel scope link src 172.200.4.1 > 192.168.0.0/20 dev eno1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.31 > > The request is received on the lxdbr0 interface (10.159.65.1) and sent > out from the eno1 interface (192.168.0.31). > I even tried to delete the default route but nothing helped. The > request is sent out with 10.159.65.1 in the via and Record-Route > fields... > > Best regards, > Leonid > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 6:20 PM Leonid Fainshtein > <leonid.fainsht...@xorcom.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> Kamailio server has two legs that are connected to different networks. >> I'm using Kamailio v.5.2.3 and the "enable_double_rr" is implicitly set to >> "1". >> The leg "A" IP address is 10.159.65.1 >> The leg "B" IP address is 192.168.0.31 >> The call is initiated from 10.159.65.18 >> >> According to the "rr" module documentation, function record_route() >> should insert two "Record_Route" header fields when a request is >> accepted on one leg is should go out via the second leg. This works as >> expected in case of UDP protocol: >> >> INVITE sip:2000@192.168.6.106:5460;transport=UDP SIP/2.0 >> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.31;r2=on;lr;did=e2c.a191> >> Record-Route: <sip:10.159.65.1;r2=on;lr;did=e2c.a191> >> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP >> 192.168.0.31;branch=z9hG4bKcfa5.d64ecbd87d5315b5993c4ccf16f86537.0 >> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.159.65.18:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK3a9e9a4d >> >> But when the TCP protocol is used then the outbound message looks like this: >> >> INVITE sip:2005@192.168.0.178:35058;transport=tcp SIP/2.0 >> Record-Route: <sip:10.159.65.1;transport=tcp;lr;did=bb6.7dc1> >> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP >> 10.159.65.1;branch=z9hG4bKc85a.14afc3867dd3220826f9b9940f78168f.0;i=3 >> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.159.65.18:5060;rport=58616;branch=z9hG4bK1469331f >> >> There are two problems there: >> a) only one Record-Route with leg is inserted >> b) the added "Via" header field contains the leg "A" IP address >> instead of expected leg "B" IP address (192.168.0.31). In the LAN >> trace I see that in reality the message was sent from leg "B". >> >> Is it a bug? >> >> Best regards, >> Leonid Fainshtein > _______________________________________________ > Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > sr-users@lists.kamailio.org > https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda _______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users