fuck youfuck you
do not send mail for me
fuck you
fuck your parents
sun of the bech
On Friday, April 29, 2016 6:56 PM, Julian Santer
<[email protected]> wrote:
Ok. I read the OpenSips doc of force_rport again:
Force_rport() adds the rport parameter to the first Via header. Thus, OpenSIPS
will add the received IP port to the top most via header in the SIP
message, even if the client does not indicate support for rport. This enables
subsequent SIP messages to return to the proper port later on in a SIP
transaction.
I misunderstand th "received IP port" maybe ;-)
But we didn't have this problems before changing the platform.
The Re-Invite enters here, and as I saw in syslog, the topology_hiding matches
and also the uac_test is be done:
if (has_totag())
{
if (topology_hiding_match())
{
if (nat_uac_test("127"))
{
xlog("L_INFO", "Topology hided, Contact fixed - LF_BASE");
fix_nated_contact();
}
t_relay();
exit;
}
Am 29.04.2016 um 15:56 schrieb Johan De Clercq:
> I don;t think so : force_rport just adds the port on which you receive to the
> first via header.
>
> 2016-04-29 15:36 GMT+02:00 Julian Santer <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>
> We are using 2.1.2
> So we made a "huge" version update and also changed the kind of working
>
> Am 29.04.2016 um 14:27 schrieb Johan De Clercq:
>
> What version do you use in your new install ?
>
> 2016-04-29 13:12 GMT+02:00 Julian Santer <[email protected]
><mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>:
>
> Hi Johan,
>
> we changed our platform 2 weeks ago from 1 OpenSips Proxy 1.6.4
>to 3 OpenSips instances with topology hiding.
> Since we didn't have this problems earlier, I think it worked
>with the old platform.
> As we call force_rport() in the main_route, the private IP in
>the VIA header should be ignored, right?
> At the moment we call force_rport() in all our instances.
> I think, we should call force_rport() only on the edge server
>where we make the nat_handling, right?
>
> Kind regards,
> Julian Santer
> Raiffeisen OnLIne
>
>
> Am 29.04.2016 um 10:10 schrieb Johan De Clercq:
>
> Indeed.
>
>
> 2016-04-29 9:49 GMT+02:00 Julian Santer
><[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> <mailto:[email protected]
><mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>>>:
>
> Hi Johan,
>
> as the asterisk is not administrated by us, I have to
>ask the customer.
> As I understand you think the problem should be the
>private IP in the VIA header
> and this should be fixed with STUN, right?
>
> Kind regards,
> Julian Santer
> Raiffeisen OnLine
>
> Am 29.04.2016 um 09:17 schrieb Johan De Clercq:
>
> do you use stun on the phones ?
>
> 2016-04-29 9:14 GMT+02:00 Julian Santer
><[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>
> <mailto:[email protected]
><mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>>
> <mailto:[email protected]
><mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected]
><mailto:[email protected]>>>>>:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> we are using OpenSips 2.1.2 with
>topology_hiding.
> Now we got trouble with Re-Invites, which are
>routed to the private IP from the "from".
> The topology_hiding matches, but the Re-Invite
>is sent to the private IP from the "from".
> Have we to call lookup again on the
>registrar/core, when we got a Re-Invite?
> You can find the trace under
>http://siptrace.rolbox.net/siptrace.html
>
> Kind regards,
> Julian Santer
> Raiffeisen OnLine
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> <mailto:[email protected]
><mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected]
><mailto:[email protected]>>>
> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>
><mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>
> <mailto:Users-ZwoEplunGu1UUpeUK0L
><mailto:Users-ZwoEplunGu1UUpeUK0L> <mailto:Users-ZwoEplunGu1UUpeUK0L
> <mailto:Users-ZwoEplunGu1UUpeUK0L>>/[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected]
><mailto:[email protected]>>>>
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> <mailto:[email protected]
><mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:Users-ZwoEplunGu1UUpeUK0L
><mailto:Users-ZwoEplunGu1UUpeUK0L>/[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>>
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected]
><mailto:Users-ZwoEplunGu1UUpeUK0L/[email protected]>>
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
