On 20 Aug 2013 18:49, "Daniel-Constantin Mierla" <mico...@gmail.com> wrote:
> the problem with the BYE is that the R-URI is the ip address of kamailio, > resulting in match for strict routing rather than loose routing (both cases > are handled by loose_route() function). > > My guess of what happens is that 41.221.230.60 detects the invite as > coming from behind nat and does something like fix_nated_contact(). Not > being the first proxy in the path of the caller, should not do any contact > mangling, but rely only on Recor-Route headers for routing. > > Hi, Thanks for the reply. I am in control of the upstream proxy, which is opensips 1.6. But I did not write the config file. There isn't any NAT between the two proxies. But I don't quite understand your suggestion that the proxy on 41.221.230.60 should route the INVITE per the Record-Route. The record-route only says what path reply packets should take? In the opensips.cfg on that box in the route block the first thing of consequence it does is: # Handle NAT #xlog("L_NOTICE","!! route (handle nat)"); if ( has_body( "application/sdp" ) ) { if ( nat_uac_test( "31" ) ) { setbflag( 1 ); fix_nated_contact(); force_rport(); fix_nated_sdp( "3" ); } } Here's what that proxy sends to the endpoint (an Asterisk server) (in this case I did the test from a different source address - 10.64.16.114 instead of 10.64.5.16): U 41.221.230.60:5060 -> 41.221.230.60:5070 INVITE sip:7171001@41.221.230.60:5070;transport=udp SIP/2.0. Record-Route: <sip:41.221.230.60;lr=on;ftag=4e98ab39>. Record-Route: <sip:10.64.16.114;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=4e98ab39;nat=yes>. Record-Route: <sip:172.16.230.128;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=4e98ab39;nat=yes>. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 41.221.230.60;branch=z9hG4bK0d3e.ad00dc64.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.64.16.114;rport=5060;received=10.64.16.114;branch=z9hG4bK0d3e.2656ccb.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 172.16.230.1:7770 ;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-a9e5930255ad0731-1---d8754z-;rport=7770. Max-Forwards: 15. Contact: <sip:2686959@10.64.16.114:5060;transport=udp>. To: <sip:7171...@vc2.connection-telecom.com>. From: "vc2 2686959"<sip:2686...@vc2.connection-telecom.com>;tag=4e98ab39. Call-ID: MDRiN2U5ZGRlMmE5YjMzYjkxOGNkMjk1MTYxOWU1MDQ. CSeq: 2 INVITE. Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY, MESSAGE, SUBSCRIBE, INFO. Content-Type: application/sdp. Proxy-Authorization: ...stuff... Supported: replaces. User-Agent: Bria 3 release 3.5.3 stamp 70600. Content-Length: 294. P-hint: outbound. X-Enswitch-RURI: sip:7171...@vc2.connection-telecom.com;transport=udp. X-Enswitch-Source: 10.64.16.114:5060. . v=0. o=- 1377021191518335 1 IN IP4 10.64.16.114. s=Bria 3 release 3.5.3 stamp 70600. c=IN IP4 10.64.16.114. t=0 0. m=audio 42646 RTP/AVP 8 18 101. a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000. a=fmtp:18 annexb=yes. a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000. a=fmtp:101 0-15. a=sendrecv. a=nortpproxy:yes. a=direction:active. You say that the BYE arrives at Kamailio with the R-URI with the IP or Kamailio. Wasn't that substitution done originally by Kamailio itself in the NAT support? Thanks, Steve
_______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users