Re: [SR-Users] nathelper module fix_nated_register(); question

On 08/02/2017 20:33, JR Richardson wrote: > Hi All, > > Just confirming when using nathelper, the fix_nated_register function > is only used to write corrected contact into to $avp then to database, > this function does not actually change the contact in the SIP message > when passing through the

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper module fix_nated_register(); question

That is accurate. The external IP info ends up in the received column/attribute. On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 01:33:56PM -0600, JR Richardson wrote: > Hi All, > > Just confirming when using nathelper, the fix_nated_register function > is only used to write corrected contact into to $avp then to datab

[SR-Users] nathelper module fix_nated_register(); question

Hi All, Just confirming when using nathelper, the fix_nated_register function is only used to write corrected contact into to $avp then to database, this function does not actually change the contact in the SIP message when passing through the proxy, correct? fix_nated_contact is used to actually

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module

Hello, On 30/11/15 14:52, Marino Mileti wrote: > > I would like to use nathelper module in order to "ping" all registered > client and "delete" (from locations table) clients that are not > reachable (maybe there's some network issue, or some other problem) > > > > I've seen that it's possible t

[SR-Users] Nathelper module

I would like to use nathelper module in order to "ping" all registered client and "delete" (from locations table) clients that are not reachable (maybe there's some network issue, or some other problem) I've seen that it's possible to have this feature for natted contact using nathelper (but

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

Hi guys, sorry for the delay. > Do you have an example of the cfg you can share? Sure thing. See attached. This doesn't contain the Path header, as I have statically configured fs_path in the dialplan on FreeSWITCH. I am exploring a possible bug in FreeSWITCH where is advertising the wrong trans

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

I had this thread already starred here in inbox, a wiki page is definitely going to be bookmarked. On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > > On 6/25/12 3:34 PM, SamyGo wrote: > > This is a great thread, really full of answers and concepts for me > atleast. > :) > > > l

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

On Jun 25, 2012, at 8:57 AM, Richard Brady wrote: > Klaus / Daniel > > Thanks again for assistance with this. > > I've tried the solution based on add_contact_alias() and > handle_ruri_alias() and it works perfectly. > > Richard > Do you have an example of the cfg you can share? Fred http:/

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

On 6/25/12 3:34 PM, SamyGo wrote: This is a great thread, really full of answers and concepts for me atleast. :) looks like we will have a new wiki page with the digested content of this thread :-) Cheers, Daniel On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Richard Brady >

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

This is a great thread, really full of answers and concepts for me atleast. :) On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Richard Brady wrote: > Klaus / Daniel > > Thanks again for assistance with this. > > I've tried the solution based on add_contact_alias() and > handle_ruri_alias() and it works perfect

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

Klaus / Daniel Thanks again for assistance with this. I've tried the solution based on add_contact_alias() and handle_ruri_alias() and it works perfectly. Richard On 22 June 2012 13:47, Klaus Darilion wrote: > > > On 22.06.2012 13:50, Richard Brady wrote: >> >> Thanks guys, fantastic answers.

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

On 22.06.2012 13:50, Richard Brady wrote: Thanks guys, fantastic answers. You mention that NAT detection happens before save() and the flag is set by lookup() which makes much more sense. However, if Kamailio is not the registrar, as is the case with my current project, those functions are not

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

Thanks guys, fantastic answers. You mention that NAT detection happens before save() and the flag is set by lookup() which makes much more sense. However, if Kamailio is not the registrar, as is the case with my current project, those functions are not called, so an alternative is needed. There ar

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

Hello, just short clarification ... On 6/22/12 10:07 AM, Klaus Darilion wrote: [...] 2. The FLT_NATS and FLB_NATB flags. I'd like to know what this stands for, I guess "flag for transaction - NAT" and "flag for branch - NAT" but what do the S and the B stand for? More importantly what do these

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

Hello, On 6/22/12 1:33 AM, Richard Brady wrote: Hi folks I've configured Kamailio as a simply multi-homed proxy offering NAT traversa, TCP connection management, etc to FreeSWICH behind it. FreeSWITCH acts as the registrar. I'm trying to understand the default config and the following thing

Re: [SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

Hi Richard! On 22.06.2012 01:33, Richard Brady wrote: Hi folks I've configured Kamailio as a simply multi-homed proxy offering NAT traversa, TCP connection management, etc to FreeSWICH behind it. FreeSWITCH acts as the registrar. I'm trying to understand the default config and the following th

[SR-Users] Nathelper module, FLT_NATS, FLT_NATB

Hi folks I've configured Kamailio as a simply multi-homed proxy offering NAT traversa, TCP connection management, etc to FreeSWICH behind it. FreeSWITCH acts as the registrar. I'm trying to understand the default config and the following things don't make sense to me (I can't find documentation o

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

Please test the latest trunk version. I removed the rtpproxy functionality from nathelper s version. You can safely use now nathelper from s with rtpproxy from generic. Regards, Ovidiu Sas On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Emil Kroymann wrote: > Am Thu, 10 Feb 2011 09:23:51 -0500 > schrieb Ovid

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

The k version of nathelper was split in two: - rtpproxy (dealing with the rtpproxy protocol); - nathelper (dealing with NAT). The same will be applied to s version. In trunk, the rtpproxy module was moved to modules (it is a generic one now). In 3.1.x, the rtpproxy module is in modules_k. Rega

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

Am Thu, 10 Feb 2011 09:23:51 -0500 schrieb Ovidiu Sas : > It seems that the s version of nathelper is the one that you are using > (I just checked the code and the bug is present there). > The rtpproxy functionality from the s version of nathelper module will > be removed soon (see the rtpproxy mo

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

It seems that the s version of nathelper is the one that you are using (I just checked the code and the bug is present there). The rtpproxy functionality from the s version of nathelper module will be removed soon (see the rtpproxy module). For now, please use the nathelper and rtpproxy modules fr

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

But this is how the code it is! Can you provide more details about which version of the code are you using? And which modules? Are you using the kamailio modules or the ser version of nathelper. Regards, Ovidiu Sas On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Emil Kroymann wrote: > I already added the log s

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

I already added the log statements for late offer and answer and checked that the messages where present in the ser logs. Also, I checked the communication between sip-router and rtpproxy with ngrep. For the 200 OK, sip-router sends the 'U' command to rtpproxy and for the ACK sip-router sends the '

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

Add some logs (print the message that you are processing and the rtp command that you are issuing). That should help you in troubleshooting your scenario. Regards, Ovidiu Sas On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 4:55 AM, Emil Kroymann wrote: > Hi, > > yeah, the script does call rtp_offer for 200 OK and rtp_a

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

Hi, yeah, the script does call rtp_offer for 200 OK and rtp_answer for ACK. So, no problem there. Emil Am Thu, 10 Feb 2011 09:46:04 +0100 schrieb Carsten Bock : > Hi, > > just a hint: If you use rtpoffer/answer for SDP in 200ojk/ACK, the > SDP-Offer is in the 200 OK, so you need to call "rtp_o

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

Hi, just a hint: If you use rtpoffer/answer for SDP in 200ojk/ACK, the SDP-Offer is in the 200 OK, so you need to call "rtp_offer" for the 200 OK instead of the usual "rtp_answer" for the 200 OK. The ACK/SDP contains then the rtp_answer. Works like a charm for me Carsten 2011/2/10 Emil Kroym

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

When I checked the code of the nathelper module that we are using, it didn't seem to be the case, that to and from tags are switched for the ACK request. Maybe, something has been changed after the point we checked out sip-router. When was this code last changed? Am Wed, 9 Feb 2011 12:51:29 -0500

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

The code seems to be correct. The to and from tags are switched for: - reply with offer (200ok with first SDP) - request with answer (ACK with second SDP) Are you sure that you are properly invoking offer/answer rtpproxy functions? Regards, Ovidiu Sas On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Emil Kr

Re: [SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

I will check that and I will get back to you. Regards, Ovidiu Sas On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Emil Kroymann wrote: > Hi, > > We recently had a problem with the nathelper module and rtpproxy in a > scenario where the SDP offer is sent only in the 200 OK. We use > sip-router 3.1 and rtp-prox

[SR-Users] nathelper-module and sdp offer in 200 OK

Hi, We recently had a problem with the nathelper module and rtpproxy in a scenario where the SDP offer is sent only in the 200 OK. We use sip-router 3.1 and rtp-proxy from git master. The sip-router configuration uses the rtpproxy_offer() and rtpproxy_answer() functions in appropriate places. The