7:13 PM
To: sr-users@lists.sip-router.org
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] ASYNC Module
On 06/12/2015 07:07 PM, Aaron Hamstra wrote:
> Jun 12 22:55:41 /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[23297]: DEBUG:
> [tcp_main.c:2552]: tcpconn_do_send(): tcp_send:
> aft£Y;ùô0#}¤V|#031Y#037$kÍlJ8CÂ}F’å«Õ=661 fd=12
&g
On 06/12/2015 07:07 PM, Aaron Hamstra wrote:
Jun 12 22:55:41 /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[23297]: DEBUG:
[tcp_main.c:2552]: tcpconn_do_send(): tcp_send:
aft£Y;ùô0#}¤V|#031Y#037$kÍlJ8CÂ}F’å«Õ=661 fd=12
Jun 12 22:55:41 /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[23297]: DEBUG: tm [t_hooks.c:288]:
run_trans_callbacks
Aaron,
On 06/12/2015 07:10 PM, Aaron Hamstra wrote:
I tried to just add a #!define ENABLE_ASYNC_MUTEX and the issue remains
In this case, the committer's comment that "it can be enabled by
defining ENABLE_ASYNC_MUTEX" does not refer to preprocessor #!defines
within the Kamailio route sc
expiration event
I tried to just add a #!define ENABLE_ASYNC_MUTEX and the issue remains
-Original Message-
From: sr-users [mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org] On Behalf Of Alex
Balashov
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 4:27 PM
To: Aaron Hamstra
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] ASYNC
I think this is the section from log when I increase debug up a notch ... I
see it mentions in the trace below that the sip_trace module is the line above
the 500 response. I just tried disabling that to see if it changed anything
and it did not .. still get the 500 response...
Jun 12 22:55
It is strange that you should see this change between minor point releases.
That does suggest a possible regression.
--
Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300
Atlanta, GA 30346
United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direc
: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
Sent from my BlackBerry.
Original Message
From: Aaron Hamstra
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 17:22
To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
Reply To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] ASYNC Module
Thanks for the
ehalf
Of Alex Balashov
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 4:11 PM
To: sr-users@lists.sip-router.org
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] ASYNC Module
Aaron,
Thanks. You seem to be getting automatic errors from TM, even though
your calling code neither creates a transaction nor calls t_relay().
This is because the wra
Aaron,
Thanks. You seem to be getting automatic errors from TM, even though
your calling code neither creates a transaction nor calls t_relay().
This is because the wrappers provided by the 'async' module utilise TM
internally; async_route() really 1) creates a transaction in TM 2)
t_suspends
send_reply("405", "Method Not Allowed");
exit;
}
}
# when routing via usrloc, log the missed calls also
if (is_method("INVITE"))
{
setflag(FLT_ACCMISSED);
}
Aaron,
Where is the call to async_route() situated in the core request route?
That is, what is called before and after the async_route?
-- Alex
On 06/12/2015 03:38 PM, Aaron Hamstra wrote:
We just updated our development environment from 4.2.2 to 4.2.5 and
started noticing the server sendin
We just updated our development environment from 4.2.2 to 4.2.5 and
started noticing the server sending a 500 I'm terribly sorry, server
error occurred (1/TM) error back as soon as the async_route block gets
called. I have removed everything from our async route other than an
xlog statement try
Hi Brandon
The feature fixed some issues one of our clients auto dialer were having.
I hope you have a great weekend.
All the best.
Will
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Brandon Armstead wrote:
> Why not just kill the call and have billing fix up for minimum duration
> occur during CDR creat
Why not just kill the call and have billing fix up for minimum duration occur
during CDR creation? Does not make sense to delay Hangup just to meet minimum
duration.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 28, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Will Ferrer wrote:
>
> Hi Daniel
>
> Yeah I am happy to be able to report
Hi Daniel
Yeah I am happy to be able to report the success. Thanks for everything as
always!
I hope you are well.
Will
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:54 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
> Hello,
>
> great that it was sorted out and it was not on Kamailio side :-)
>
> Also, glad to hear that as
Hello,
great that it was sorted out and it was not on Kamailio side :-)
Also, glad to hear that async processing did increase capacity to handle
more concurrent calls, even it was causing troubles to other
applications ...
Cheers,
Daniel
On 28/01/15 05:40, Will Ferrer wrote:
> Hello
>
> I wante
Hello
I wanted to give an update on this.
My business partner that found the issue and has been monitoring the
problem has tracked down the issue. It turns out that the features we
implemented using the async module were leading to more calls going on con
currently (as they were intended to) and
Hi All
We are trying to use the async module to to delay sending a bye on from one
end of the call to the other.
We are using async_route(routename, seconds) to delay the WITHINDLG route.
The idea is that in the future we want to be able to have our billing min
duration enforced (though currently
18 matches
Mail list logo
