Hi Bogdan,
After running additional debugs, for some reason the call to
loose_route() is failing.
if (loose_route()) {
# mark routing logic in request
xlog("L_INFO", "loose_route() succeeded\n ");
route(1);
} else{
xlog("L_INFO", "loose_route()failed - M=$rm RURI=$ru F=$fu
T=$tu IP=$si ID=$ci\n");
};
Any ideas why this could be occuring?
On 2/22/07, Andy Pyles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> HI Bogdan,
>
> I'm already using an almsot identical version of uas.xml and
uac.xml (
> yes rrs=true) is being used. However in your version the uas.xml
> doesn't have rrs="true" after initial invite which I think is
needed.
> See as you can see below, setting rrs="true" for uac will only
work if
> it receives a Record-Route header in the 200OK which it's not.
>
> In this case, ALL messages from openser to sipp uac do not
contain the
> Record-route header. So I don't think it's a sipp problem, but an
> openser configuration problem. I've tried using other devices
for a
> uac, such as x-lite but the same problem.
>
> Andy
>
> On 2/22/07, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Andy,
> >
> > so it's about sipp :D - I remember I had some hard times to
make it work
> > with record Route.
> >
> > take a look at the attached files, they might help you.
> >
> > regards,
> > bogdan
> >
> > Andy Pyles wrote:
> > > HI Bogdan,
> > >
> > > thanks for your reply.
> > > yes you are correct. The Bye doesn't have the Route header.
> > > It appears the the 200 OK sent to the caller doesn't contain a
> > > Record-route header.
> > > Messages between openser and callee contain record-route
information,
> > > but messages between caller and openser do not.
> > > Is there a way to enable that?
> > >
> > > Here's more detail:
> > > 192.168.0.101 = Caller (sipp)
> > > 1.2.3.4 = openser
> > > 4.3.2.1 = callee ( sipp)
> > >
> > >
> > > 1.) 192.168.0.101 -> 1.2.3.4 SIP/SDP Request: INVITE
> > > sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060, with session description
> > > 2.) 1.2.3.4 -> 192.168.0.101 SIP Status: 100 Giving a try
> > > 3.) 1.2.3.4 -> 4.3.2.1 SIP/SDP Request: INVITE
> > > sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060, with session description
> > > 4.) 4.3.2.1 -> 1.2.3.4 SIP Status: 180 Ringing
> > > 5.) 4.3.2.1 -> 1.2.3.4 SIP/SDP Status: 200 OK,
with session
> > > description
> > > 6.) 1.2.3.4 -> 192.168.0.101 SIP Status: 180 Ringing
> > > 7.) 1.2.3.4 -> 192.168.0.101 SIP/SDP Status: 200 OK,
with session
> > > description
> > > 8.) 192.168.0.101 -> 1.2.3.4 SIP Request: ACK
> > > sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060
> > > 9.) 1.2.3.4 -> 4.3.2.1 SIP Request: ACK
sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060
> > > 10.) 192.168.0.101 -> 1.2.3.4 SIP Request: BYE
> > > sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060
> > > 11.) 1.2.3.4 -> 4.3.2.1 SIP Request: BYE
sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060
> > > 12.) 4.3.2.1 -> 1.2.3.4 SIP Status: 200 OK
> > > 13.) 1.2.3.4 -> 192.168.0.101 SIP Status: 200 OK
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Packets 6,7 and following contain no Record-route information.
> > > The other weird thing is that openser is passing on the
Route: header
> > > it recevied from callee to the caller.
> > >
> > >
> > > Please see attached for complete ngrep output.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/21/07, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> Hi Andy,
> > >>
> > >> could you check on the net if the BYE contain the Route hdr
added to
> > >> INVITE as Record-Route? I have some doubts on this as I see:
> > >> 0(966) find_first_route: No Route headers found
> > >> 0(966) loose_route: There is no Route HF
> > >>
> > >> and if the BYE is not identified, the dialog is not closed.
> > >>
> > >> regards,
> > >> bogdan
> > >>
> > >> Andy Pyles wrote:
> > >> > Hello,
> > >> >
> > >> > I have a question on how to configure the dialog module
( 1.2.x from
> > >> > cvs yesterday ).
> > >> >
> > >> > With my config, ( attached) I can make calls and have
verified that
> > >> > the acc module is working correctly.
> > >> >
> > >> > My question is, when I enable the dialog module, I can
see that it is
> > >> > incrementing call count correctly, but when a bye is
received, the
> > >> > dialog:active_dialogs statistic is never decremented.
> > >> >
> > >> > In the debug level 9 logs, ( also attached) I see this
error after the
> > >> > 200OK is sent to the bye:
> > >> >
> > >> > 1(969) DBUG:dialog:unref_dlg: unref dlg 0xa7ce5a98 with 1
> > >> (delete=0)-> 1
> > >> >
> > >> > Is this a case of one of the timers being set too short?
by the way
> > >> > using a variable call length from well under a second (
using sipp )
> > >> > to 20 second call doesnt' seem to make a difference .
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> > Andy
> > >> >
