[OpenSIPS-Users] Dialog Ping

[Duane Larson]

I thought that might be the issue.  I will look into what I am doing.

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Vlad Paiu <vladpaiu at opensips.org> wrote:

> **
> Hello,
>
> Glad to see that it has worked.
>
> I see that the To and From headers are different in the generated pings,
> sip:90133X9XX8 at irock.com vs sip:933X9XX8 at irock.com .
> Are you using uac_replace_to/uac_replace_from to mangled the To and From
> headers, or how are you manipulating the headers ?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Vlad Paiu
> OpenSIPS Developer
>
>
>
>  On 07/14/2011 06:01 PM, Duane Larson wrote:
>
> That fix did fix my issue.  This is what I am seeing now and I am guessing
> this could be an issue.  Figure it might have something to do with the fact
> that I change the To: and From: headers maybe?
>
> U 2011/07/14 09:55:01.570108 173.XXX.XXX.107:5060 -> 64.132.245.122:15073
> OPTIONS sip:drnahsqf at 64.132.245.122:15073 SIP/2.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 173.XXX.XXX.107;branch=z9hG4bK40f.8ea107f4.0.
> To: <sip:90127X2XX9 at irock.com>;tag=6mZ.hX2A2HzZ2j99ttSvNxStBLVnzI4n.
> From: <sip:933X9XX8 at irock.com>;tag=f55753a702964d54babd04143f8f831d.
> CSeq: 1 OPTIONS.
> Call-ID: AZ9B9EO4ZJo58X9UyZWv-pzeD7nyQaiM.
> Content-Length: 0.
> User-Agent: OpenSIPS (1.8.0-dev0-notls (x86_64/linux)).
> .
> #
> U 2011/07/14 09:55:01.570159 173.XXX.XXX.107:5060 -> 64.132.245.122:15052
> OPTIONS sip:mckldeuz at 64.132.245.122:15052 SIP/2.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 173.XXX.XXX.107;branch=z9hG4bKc3b7.c0c22472.0.
> To: <sip:90133X9XX8 at irock.com>;tag=f55753a702964d54babd04143f8f831d.
> From: <sip:90127X2XX9 at irock.com>;tag=6mZ.hX2A2HzZ2j99ttSvNxStBLVnzI4n.
> CSeq: 31012 OPTIONS.
> Call-ID: AZ9B9EO4ZJo58X9UyZWv-pzeD7nyQaiM.
> Content-Length: 0.
> User-Agent: OpenSIPS (1.8.0-dev0-notls (x86_64/linux)).
> .
> #
> U 2011/07/14 09:55:01.604366 64.132.245.122:15073 -> 173.XXX.XXX.107:5060
> SIP/2.0 500 Unhandled by dialog usages.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
> 173.XXX.XXX.107;received=173.XXX.XXX.107;branch=z9hG4bK40f.8ea107f4.0.
> Call-ID: AZ9B9EO4ZJo58X9UyZWv-pzeD7nyQaiM.
> From: <sip:933X9XX8 at irock.com>;tag=f55753a702964d54babd04143f8f831d.
> To: <sip:90127X2XX9 at irock.com>;tag=6mZ.hX2A2HzZ2j99ttSvNxStBLVnzI4n.
> CSeq: 1 OPTIONS.
> Server: Blink 0.24.1 (MacOSX).
> Content-Length:  0.
> .
> #
> U 2011/07/14 09:55:01.607154 64.132.245.122:15052 -> 173.XXX.XXX.107:5060
> SIP/2.0 500 Unhandled by dialog usages.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
> 173.XXX.XXX.107;received=173.XXX.XXX.107;branch=z9hG4bKc3b7.c0c22472.0.
> Call-ID: AZ9B9EO4ZJo58X9UyZWv-pzeD7nyQaiM.
> From: <sip:90127X2XX9 at irock.com>;tag=6mZ.hX2A2HzZ2j99ttSvNxStBLVnzI4n.
> To: <sip:90133X9XX8 at irock.com>;tag=f55753a702964d54babd04143f8f831d.
> CSeq: 31012 OPTIONS.
> Server: Blink 0.2.7 (Windows).
> Content-Length:  0.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Vlad Paiu <vladpaiu at opensips.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello Brett,
>>
>> In 1.6.x the dialog could have also been created by setting a flag from
>> the script, but this was dropped in 1.7.0.
>>
>> Quite a few modules used the Dialog internal API to create dialogs on
>> their own, like trace_dialog() in Siptrace, engage_rtp_proxy() in RTPProxy,
>> or even the ACC module when generating CDRs.
>>
>> The latest commit should fix all of these issues, where the dialog was
>> created internally by a function called from the script, and pinging or
>> automatic timeout would have been skipped.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> --
>> Vlad Paiu
>> OpenSIPS Developer
>>
>>
>>
>>  On 07/14/2011 05:43 PM, Brett Nemeroff wrote:
>>
>>  On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Vlad Paiu <vladpaiu at opensips.org>wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Duane,
>>>
>>> Just took a look at your config.
>>> What was happening is that you were first calling trace_dialog(), which
>>> creates the dialog structure internally. When the call to
>>> create_dialog("PpB") came later on, it already found that the dialog was
>>> created and did not set the needed flags for pinging.
>>>
>>>
>> Nice catch here...
>>
>> Are there any other "automatic dialog creation" methods that might
>> interfere with the dialog creation flags being set?
>>
>> -Brett
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.opensips.orghttp://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> *--*--*--*--*--*
> Duane
> *--*--*--*--*--*
> --
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing listUsers at lists.opensips.orghttp://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>


-- 
--
*--*--*--*--*--*
Duane
*--*--*--*--*--*
--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20110714/928778ee/attachment.htm>