#103 removing existing contact with ip:port like new contact

trunk
closed-rejected
modules (179)
5
2009-08-20
2009-08-04
No

When SIP-client app lost network, other client can send REGISTER with the same IP:PORT. You can resolve this problem by usin this patch.

Discussion

  • Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

    Hi Vladimir,

    could you explain a bit more in details what the patch provides? an example will be really helpful here.
    I'm asking as the I want to be sure that whatever change you need, it is not against the RFC3261 (on how the user registration and contact matching works).

    Thanks and regards,
    Bogdan

     
  • Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

    • assigned_to: nobody --> bogdan_iancu
     
  • Vladimir Kuznetsov

    Example:
    Step 1: CLIENT1 send REGISTER from 10.10.10.10:1234.
    Step 2: CLIENT1 lost network
    Step 3: CLIENT2 connecting to network and receive IP 10.10.10.10
    Step 4: CLIENT2 connecting to SIP server with this IP and port 1234 (He send REGISTER from 10.10.10.10:1234)
    Step 5: somebody calls to CLIENT1 -> CLIENT2 has incoming call because he has ip:port like CLIENT1 and REGISTER timeout for CLIENT1 was not expired.

    This problem we have using mobile WiMAX network. This patch resolve this problem:
    when CLIENT2 send REGISTER, SIP server delete record for CLIENT1 from database. We set flag db_mode=DB_ONLY for usrloc module and this patch can be using only with this flag.

     
  • Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

    I see. But such a auto-removal will affect devices with multiple lines. Ex:
    1) device registers Line 1 (AOR1) with contact 10.10.10.10:1234
    2) device registers Line 2 (AOR2) with contact 10.10.10.10:1234 ->usrloc will remove the registration of the first line, as it has the same IP and port

    Regards,
    Bogdan

     
  • Iñaki Baz Castillo

    Vladimir, you are "solving" a problem which is not a problem. This just solves a *client* problem in your escenario but breaks RFC 3261 specifications since multiple AoR registrations are allowed from the same address:port.

    I use Tinkle softphone which allows me having 10-50 different SIP accounts registered at the same time, and it uses the same address:port for all. This is perfectly valid according to RFC 3261 and your patch woudl break it.

     
  • Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

    Unfortunately, the behaviour introduced by this patch breaks the RFC3261 specs.

    Vladimir, if you find a different solution to your problem, please open a new report.

    Thanks and regards,
    Bogdan

     
  • Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

    • status: open --> closed-rejected
     

Log in to post a comment.