Thanks Cesc, that would explain things. I'll ask the developers list about known issues in this area before I carry on. Regards Steve
-----Original Message----- From: Cesc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 25 July 2006 12:23 To: Stephen Paterson Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS mmm ... not sure, but i see u are trying to use sips: ... it is just a gut feeling, but i don't think ser/openser has full support of it ... and you probably just stumbled against a proof. Cesc On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm posting this again due to lack of response. If this is the wrong forum > for this kind of query, please could someone let me know of a list that would > be more appropriate. After further investigation and successful testing > against other UAs I am less inclined to believe that the problem lies with > our TLS implementation, rather that the problem lies with OpenSER. > > Regards > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Paterson > Sent: 21 July 2006 15:52 > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: Error parsing URI's using TLS > > > Hi all, > > I've just started using OpenSER to test our SIP implementation and have > encountered a problem with TLS early on. I can register with the server > without any problem but my calls fail. The logging from the server shows: > > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: > preverify is good: verify return: 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: > depth = 0 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: > preverify is good: verify return: 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: > depth = 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: > preverify is good: verify return: 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: > depth = 0 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: > preverify is good: verify return: 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too > short: <sip:> (4) > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad > uri <sip:> > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: loose_route: Error while > parsing Request URI > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too > short: <sip:> (4) > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad > uri <sip:> > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: do_action:error in > expression > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too > short: <sip:> (4) > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad > uri <sip:> > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: do_action:error in > expression > > This would suggest that my (for example) From header contains a URI of: > <sip:>! Not overly useful you might say. Now, the same INVITE without > encryption works fine with OpenSER (using either TCP or UDP) and a > serialisation of the INVITE immediately before encryption (shown below) shows > the correct URIs in all the right places. > > INVITE sips:[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0 > From: steve <sips:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;tag=ACU-6975-c47afeff > To: steve <sips:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Contact: <sips:10.202.200.143:5061> > Call-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > CSeq: 26984 INVITE > Content-Length: 281 > Content-Type: application/sdp > Allow: INVITE > Allow: ACK > Allow: BYE > Allow: CANCEL > Allow: OPTIONS > Allow: NOTIFY > Allow: REFER > Allow: PRACK > Allow: INFO > Allow: UPDATE > Accept: application/sdp > Accept: application/isup > Accept: application/qsig > Accept: multipart/mixed > Accept-Encoding: identity > Accept-Language: en > Supported: replaces > Supported: 100rel > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS > 10.202.200.143:5061;branch=z9hG4bKeb10b5f6-18c6-11db-bff7-971e76d819bf > Max-Forwards: 70 > Route: <sips:10.202.200.132:5061;lr> > > ... SDP omitted > > For the moment I am pretty much assuming that this is a problem with our > implementation as it is still under development but I can't work out what. > 2 questions: > > 1. Does anyone have any general thoughts as to what might be going wrong? > 2. Is it possible to get more logging from OpenSER that might shed some light? > > Regards > > Steve > > Steve Paterson > Software Engineer > Aculab > Tel: +44 (0) 1908 273866 > Fax: +44 (0) 1908 273801 > Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Website: http://www.aculab.com > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
