Why not relay registrations to Kamailio after injecting a Path header? It seems like you’re taking the long, circuitous, and rickety way around.
— Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors. > On Aug 16, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Johnny Ritzer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > What are your thoughts on architecture build of the following scenarios. > > The PBX doesn’t support websockets and we want to use sip.js / jsSip. (use > Kama as wss:// SIP proxy) > PBX has direct PRI/sip Trunks/ DID control/ Voicemail. > PBX hosts SIP extensions. > > > UA à Kamailio à PBX > > > --------SCENARIO A.) ------- Host SIP[xxxx] extensions on Kama box but > same SIP extensions are also on PBX [xxxx] > Build some sort of control to register handle kama to pbx …. (but reg > webclients) > > Kama [1100] SIP-PBX [1100] > > Does kama act as the UA 1100 / registered to PBX > > What about UA to kamailio (do we do 1100a so UA-kama is 1100a) but kama is > maintain REG/status/ but passing that IF client is online ? > > MWI (voicemail is hosted on PBX) so how does that move through can it. > > ------- SCENARIO B.) ------ Proxy all/ everything . use route[REGFW] > Forward all REG to PBX.. > > Issues ---- > MWI (SIP notify ?) > SIP Incoming CALL incoming calls to work. (if UA holds REG to outbound > proxy on PBX or ) > DTMF (sipINFO) doesn’t work (I see it sending) > I noticed I crashed the PBX because all the SIP scanners started pounding my > Kamailio box after 2 days when I added route[REGFW] it starting eating up > SIP trunk channels on PBX cause started forwarding everything. Like it > starting [email protected] [email protected] . > > Or might need to look at fail2ban pike module to oget this but still had > issues I just don’t know where to look or code to fix on SCENARIO B > > > > Snippets on my testing . > > route[REGFWD] { > if(!is_method("REGISTER")) > { > return; > } > > $var(rip) = $sel(cfg_get.PBX.bindip); > $uac_req(method)="REGISTER"; > $uac_req(ruri)="sip:" + $var(rip) + ":" + $sel(cfg_get.PBX.bindport); > $uac_req(furi)="sip:" + $au + "@" + $var(rip); > $uac_req(turi)="sip:" + $au + "@" + "kamaproxy"; > # $uac_req(turi)="sip:" + $au + "@" + $var(rip); > $uac_req(hdrs)="Contact: <sip:" + $au + "@" > + > $sel(cfg_get.kamailio.bindip) > + ":" + > $sel(cfg_get.kamailio.bindport) + ">\r\n"; > if($sel(contact.expires) != $null) > $uac_req(hdrs)= $uac_req(hdrs) + "Expires: " + > $sel(contact.expires) + "\r\n"; > else > $uac_req(hdrs)= $uac_req(hdrs) + "Expires: " + > $hdr(Expires) + "\r\n"; > uac_req_send(); > } > #!endif > > > --------------- > > So this led me to extra security should I host SIP extensions on kamailio > as an extra security but then what about MWI/inbound then) or do I have 1100 > on kama which mitel is 1100 but I pass all info from inbound. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List > [email protected] > https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List [email protected] https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
