headers
Steve Langstaff | 1 Feb 2006 16:40

Problem with siproxd not rewriting request URI

I have a problem with an installation of siproxd not rewriting a request URI correctly.

I'm not sure of the version number of siproxd - I don't administer the server - but it's from the back end of 2005.

The problem that I am seeing is that I can register a contact address correctly, but the incoming INVITE URI
is not rewritten to be the contact address, as the following packet fragments show:

Here is my request to the registrar, before hitting siproxd:

<--- REGISTER sip:service.provider.com SIP/2.0

        To: sip:123456@...
        From: sip:123456@...
        Contact: sip:line1@...:5065;expires=3600

And here is the response:

---> SIP/2.0 200 OK

        From: <sip:123456@...>
        To: <sip:123456@...>;tag=something
        Contact: <sip:line1@...:5065>;q=0.00;expires=3600

So now siproxd knows that to reach sip:123456@... it
should rewrite message URIs to sip:line1@...:5065.

Now, here is a call coming in to sip:123456@...

---> INVITE sip:123456@...:5065 SIP/2.0
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Thomas Ries | 1 Feb 2006 20:07
Picon

Re: Problem with siproxd not rewriting request URI

I'd really like to have more details to see what is going on exactly.
Especially the whole SIP communication in front and after siproxd.

Don't you have the chance to ask the admin of the machine to assist you
to record a debug log? Do you have the chance to reproduce this effect
on a machine that you have under control? You should also try with the
latest snapshot of siproxd.

Regards,

/Thomas

On  1 Feb, Steve Langstaff wrote:
> I have a problem with an installation of siproxd not rewriting a request URI correctly.
> 
> I'm not sure of the version number of siproxd - I don't administer the server - but it's from the back end of 2005.
> 
> The problem that I am seeing is that I can register a contact address correctly, but the incoming INVITE URI
is not rewritten to be the contact address, as the following packet fragments show:
> 
> Here is my request to the registrar, before hitting siproxd:
> 
> <--- REGISTER sip:service.provider.com SIP/2.0
> 
>         To: sip:123456@...
>         From: sip:123456@...
>         Contact: sip:line1@...:5065;expires=3600
> 
> And here is the response:
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michael Procter | 2 Feb 2006 12:08

RE: Problem with siproxd not rewriting request URI


Thomas Ries wrote:
> 
> I'd really like to have more details to see what is going on exactly.
> Especially the whole SIP communication in front and after siproxd.
> 
> Don't you have the chance to ask the admin of the machine to 
> assist you
> to record a debug log? Do you have the chance to reproduce this effect
> on a machine that you have under control? You should also try with the
> latest snapshot of siproxd.
> 

I am the admin of the machine in question.  I updated to the 02Feb2006
snapshot this morning, and the problem remained.  I've looked a little
further and come up with a fix.  The problem seemed to be in the
function
proxy_rewrite_request_uri, in that it only rewrote 2 of the 4 components
of the uri.  Rewriting the 'username' component made it work, but I
added
rewriting of the scheme too, just for completeness.

Regards,

Michael Procter

*** siproxd-0.5.12-snapshot-02Feb20006-orig/src/proxy.c  2006-01-01
20:31:54.000000000 +0000
--- siproxd-0.5.12-snapshot-02Feb2006/src/proxy.c       2006-02-02
10:34:02.000000000 +0000
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
Thomas Ries | 3 Feb 2006 23:10
Picon

Re: Problem with siproxd not rewriting request URI

Hello Michael,

Thanks for the feedback. All this sounds logical to me. I just wonder
why I didn't implement it then... Maybe I have to read through the RFC
again. I can't remember a specific reason why I did not do it.
Anyhow, I'll integrate you changes, Thanks a lot.

Regards,
/Thomas

On  2 Feb, Michael Procter wrote:
> 
> Thomas Ries wrote:
>> 
>> I'd really like to have more details to see what is going on exactly.
>> Especially the whole SIP communication in front and after siproxd.
>> 
>> Don't you have the chance to ask the admin of the machine to 
>> assist you
>> to record a debug log? Do you have the chance to reproduce this effect
>> on a machine that you have under control? You should also try with the
>> latest snapshot of siproxd.
>> 
> 
> I am the admin of the machine in question.  I updated to the 02Feb2006
> snapshot this morning, and the problem remained.  I've looked a little
> further and come up with a fix.  The problem seemed to be in the
> function
> proxy_rewrite_request_uri, in that it only rewrote 2 of the 4 components
> of the uri.  Rewriting the 'username' component made it work, but I
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |

Gmane