Can you share here the parameters you set for tm module?
Daniel
On 19/12/13 01:55, Kelvin Chua wrote:
Also noticed $ru pegged at the first branch's ruri upon entering
failure_route for succeeding branches. Is this also an expected
behaviour? Should it not contain the ruri of the previous fai
i started to wonder, why my config does not work when there is
';user=phone' param in r-uri. in order to investigate, i added these to
the config:
xlog("L_INFO", "r-uri = '$ru'\n");
xlog("L_INFO", "r-uri params = '$(ru{uri.params})'\n");
xlog("L_INFO", "r-uri params = '$sel(ruri.param
Also noticed $ru pegged at the first branch's ruri upon entering
failure_route for succeeding branches. Is this also an expected behaviour?
Should it not contain the ruri of the previous failed branch?
On Dec 18, 2013 4:19 PM, "Daniel-Constantin Mierla"
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I will look over it --
Hi,
Seems like two ims module links (linked from
http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/) are broken:
http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/ims_registrar_pcscf.html
http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/ims_usrloc_scscf.html
The same for http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/,
Yes. I originally developed the module for the 3.2 version, so, if you take
the source code and compile it on the 3.x branch, it should work.
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Oliver Roth wrote:
> Is it possible to run this module with Kamailio version 3.3?
>
>
>
> As we are not able to run K
Is it possible to run this module with Kamailio version 3.3?
As we are not able to run Kamailio 4.x with carrierroute and Ubuntu 12.04 - we
have to stay with Kamailio 3.3
Von: sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org
[mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org] Im Auftrag von Carlos Ruiz Díaz
Ge
ACK
:)
Op 18-dec.-2013, om 15:30 heeft Daniel-Constantin Mierla
het volgende geschreven:
> Hello,
>
> On 18/12/13 10:53, davy wrote:
>> Cool, I'll spend some time this weekend to have a first stake in the ground
>> on the wiki !
>
> great! Just use namespaces when creating new pages, to hav
Hello,
On 18/12/13 10:53, davy wrote:
Cool, I'll spend some time this weekend to have a first stake in the ground on
the wiki !
great! Just use namespaces when creating new pages, to have a good
structure of the wiki. It can be something under tutorials, such as:
tutorials:security:TITLE
Hi JR,
I am a bit behind my plans to have it out this year on late autumn -
last two chapters not finished yet due to heavy traveling in the past
few months and release of v4.1, so hopefully is a matter of several
weeks now.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 18/12/13 14:41, JR Richardson wrote:
Hi Daniel
Hi Daniel,
What is the status and possible release date for your admin book. The last
update is it will be released as an e-Book only, that's ok with me.
Thanks.
JR
JR Richardson
- - - - - - - - - - -
Engineering for the Masses
___
Hi Oliver,
maybe you can use the cnxcc prepaid module [1].
Hopefully, it is what you are looking for.
[1] http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/modules/cnxcc.html#idp130984
Regards,
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Oliver Roth wrote:
> Hi all
>
>
>
> I need a solution to limit the amount
Hi all
I need a solution to limit the amount of concurrent calls by trunk or
user/subscriber.
We have the following situation:
Kamailio loadbalancer ==> 3 kamailio gateway with routing/business logic
Kamailio is version 3.3 for all 4 systems.
Loadbalancer has only the absolute minimum config t
On 12/18/2013 06:11 AM, davy wrote:
But I think two aspects might be very handy. A first would be to list
all the attacks on VoIP networks known to man, and how Kamailio can
help defending on this, with e.g. config snippets, …
A second which I personally find very interesting, is how we can hav
Alex,
Thx for your prompt feedback!
We could conclude that stating something like "This config is the best way to
secure your Kamailio", is a contradictio in terminis ;)
But I think two aspects might be very handy. A first would be to list all the
attacks on VoIP networks known to man, and ho
Davy,
I would also weigh on the side of saying that Kamailio security, even in
a best-practical, common denominator kind of way, is inextricably bound
up in the specificity of how Kamailio is being used, the role it's
playing as a network element, the topology in which it is participating,
et
Awesome :)
Op 18-dec.-2013, om 11:02 heeft "Olle E. Johansson" het
volgende geschreven:
>
> On 18 Dec 2013, at 10:53, davy wrote:
>
>> Cool, I'll spend some time this weekend to have a first stake in the ground
>> on the wiki !
>>
>> It's better to have our security measures being checked
On 18 Dec 2013, at 10:53, davy wrote:
> Cool, I'll spend some time this weekend to have a first stake in the ground
> on the wiki !
>
> It's better to have our security measures being checked by peers than by
> hackers ;)
Thank you, Davy!
When you've got a template, ping me. I can send out i
Cool, I'll spend some time this weekend to have a first stake in the ground on
the wiki !
It's better to have our security measures being checked by peers than by
hackers ;)
Op 18-dec.-2013, om 09:33 heeft Daniel-Constantin Mierla
het volgende geschreven:
> Hello,
>
> On 17/12/13 17:27, d
Hello,
I am considering to release a new version out of branch 4.0 (previous
stable branch) before Christmas holidays. Depending on the available
time, it could be this Friday or next week on Monday. If there are
patches to be backported, do them as soon as possible.
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Danie
Hello,
the last two stable branches are now 4.0 and 4.1. I am considering
packaging the latest branch 3.3 as release 3.3.6 and mark the end of
releasing from that branch. Patches can still go there if developers
find time for them, but the focus on release will go on 4.0 and 4.1.
Hopefully I
Hello,
On 17/12/13 17:27, davy wrote:
Hi all,
we all enjoy our FAIL2BAN and snippets of our Kamailio config when we see it successfully
fight off the "friendly-scanner", and multiple futile attempts to fool our
systems. But it got me thinking…
What is a sufficient level of security on our Ka
Hi Gennaro,
>From the log:
Dec 17 12:31:40 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[28045]: INFO: ims_icscf
[cxdx_avp.c:137]: cxdx_get_avp(): cxdx_get_experimental_result_code:
Failed finding avp
Dec 17 12:31:40 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[28045]: ERROR: ims_icscf
[cxdx_uar.c:211]: async_cdp_uar_callback():
Hello,
I will look over it -- I wanted to know exactly the situation.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 17/12/13 15:54, Kelvin Chua wrote:
Yes, a local timeout. The call was sent to a bogus IP. i still feel
this behaviour is wrong. $rd in acc should contain the failed
gateway's ip and not the previous one.
Hello everyone,
I'm using kamailio modules as Interrogating-cscf and Serving-cscf.
Registering an user i perform correctly an UAR and the HSS answers
correctly with an UAA giving user'c server-capabilities.
Even if i have a success result code ( as you can see in the attached
wireshark dump) the c
24 matches
Mail list logo
