Hi Razvan, I just noticed that since Topo hiding function gives error, the calls using this do not show any changes in CallID or Contact or any other details , seems like topohiding is not doing it's job for such calls anymore. !
Kindly let me know of anything further required to get this resolved. Thanks, Sammy. On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 1:30 PM, SamyGo <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Razvan, > > > Here is the requested data. > > > > *INITIAL INVITE: *Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 123.123.212.123:5061;branch= > z9hG4bK442.8373b213.0;i=35f5 > > > *200 OK from the B party as received by OpenSIPS:* > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 118.151.101.64:5061;branch=z9hG4bK442.9a584727.0;i=11 > > > > *200 OK as sent out by OpenSIPS:* > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 123.123.212.123:5061;received= > 123.123.212.123;rport=48664;branch=z9hG4bK442.8373b213.0;i=35f5 > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 123.123.212.123:5061;received= > 123.123.212.123;rport=48664;branch=z9hG4bK442.8373b213.0;i=35f5 > > > Here is the portion of debug log where the destination Answers the call > and topology Hiding restore VIA twice. > > http://pastebin.com/z7pt7cwM > > > Thanks for your response and time looking at this for me. > > > Regards, > Sammy. > > > On Nov 14, 2016 3:49 AM, "Răzvan Crainea" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, Samy! >> >> Can you post on pastebin debugging logs related to this call? Also, can >> you also post the Via headers of the initial INVITE and for the 200 OK >> received by OpenSIPS? >> >> Best regards, >> >> Răzvan Crainea >> OpenSIPS Solutionswww.opensips-solutions.com >> >> On 11/12/2016 12:33 AM, SamyGo wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm using OpenSIPS 2.2.1 version and I'm facing a weird situation where >> OpenSIPS is adding a duplicated VIA header to the 200 OK, This only happens >> when I've topology_hiding() engaged into the call. >> >> The scenario is very simple; two users making call to each other on the >> same OpenSIPS but with topology_hiding(). As a consequence of this double >> VIA the caller device doesn't trigger the ACK and hence we don't get media >> stream established between devices. >> >> >> *WITH TOPOLOGYHIDING:* >> SIP/2.0 200 OK >> Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 10.1.10.51:59231;received=7X.X >> X.XX.X7;rport=59231;branch=z9hG4bK-607165482-63 >> Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 10.1.10.51:59231;received=7X.XX.XX.X7 >> ;rport=59231;branch=z9hG4bK-607165482-63 >> CSeq: 1 INVITE >> ... >> >> >> *WITHOUT TOPOHIDING: * >> SIP/2.0 200 OK >> Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 10.1.10.51:59223;received=7X.XX.XX.X7 >> ;rport=59223;branch=z9hG4bK-607166212-58 >> CSeq: 1 INVITE >> >> >> The only difference between the two scenarios is the function >> topology_hiding(); is commented out. >> >> It seems like a bug to me, can anyone guide me here validate this. >> >> * OpenSIPS Version:* >> version: opensips 2.2.1 (x86_64/linux) >> flags: STATS: On, DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC, >> F_MALLOC, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT >> ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS=1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_LISTEN 16, >> MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535 >> poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select. >> git revision: 68ace2e >> main.c compiled on 18:34:37 Sep 28 2016 with gcc 4.8 >> >> >> Thanks, >> Sammy >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing >> [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
