[Users] looping problem

[samuel]

That's exactly what I mean and I don't know wether in 1.1 it's gonna
be solved...Can any core developer shed some light on this??

The "best" way to solve this is to decrement Max-Forwards: header to a
really low value (3 or 4 instead of the current minimum 16) BUT BE
CAREFULL because you might have problems of failed sessions in remote
proxies (it depends a lot on your topology and offered services). With
this configuration your loop problem will reduce from the current 16
to 3 or 4.... I repeat THIS COULD INTRODUCE INTEROPERABIOLITY
issues.....use it with care.

Another approach would be to increase the number of children so the
probability that all openSER children get blocked is really low and
the user experience is not affected. In this way you will just see
from time to time the loop-effect on your logs and nothing more.

I can not provide you more info...hope I was not wrong and it helped
you a little....

Samuel.


2006/5/5, unplug <maillisting at gmail.com>:
> Thanks!
> Do you mean that the CANCEL matching problem (2nd problem) may be a
> bug in the openser core and may be solved in the 1.1 version?  In the
> mean time, any suggestion to prevent it (in setting of configuration
> file) and how can you handle it?
> Just to want get more information about that problem.
>
> On 5/4/06, samuel <samu60 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > It looks like the listen and alias statement are properly configured
> > and your openser will likely detect the CANCEL targeted to itself
> > (check the logs).
> > The "problem" is that if you do not add a port to the listen|alias
> > then openSER assumes that the server is listening to all ports. This
> > leads to problems when you have other SIP entities colocated to
> > openSER in the same machine.
> > If you do add port to the listen|alias then ONLY those ports will
> > match the myself condition.
> > From your config file you would match ALL ports because you have the
> > alias set to 10.200.0.228.
> > There was recently a thread about aliases in openser, you might find
> > more info there...
> > From the dokuwiki:
> > "It is necessary to include the port (the value used in the "port="
> > defintion) in the alias definition otherwise the loose_route()
> > function will not work as expected for local forwards"
> >
> > So add the 5060 port to the alias and check if it is solved.
> >
> >
> > About the second problem....it's been a long time since I last checked
> > it so I might be totally wrong and the core developers should provide
> > you more info. The CANCEL matching is something really inside openSER
> > and requires quite changes in the core. I repeat that this might be
> > solved because in SER it has been done so somebody might have ported
> > it to openSER.
> >
> > Hope it helps,
> > Samuel.
>