opensipstack-devel Mailing List for OpenSIPStack (Page 35)
Brought to you by:
joegenbaclor
Menu
▾
▴
opensipstack-devel
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2006 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(5) |
Jun
(12) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(3) |
Sep
(24) |
Oct
(45) |
Nov
(41) |
Dec
(67) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 |
Jan
(51) |
Feb
(93) |
Mar
(54) |
Apr
(76) |
May
(114) |
Jun
(133) |
Jul
(124) |
Aug
(180) |
Sep
(53) |
Oct
(41) |
Nov
(109) |
Dec
(92) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(52) |
Feb
(40) |
Mar
(29) |
Apr
(40) |
May
(83) |
Jun
(68) |
Jul
(30) |
Aug
(72) |
Sep
(50) |
Oct
(48) |
Nov
(25) |
Dec
(80) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(9) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(32) |
Apr
(67) |
May
|
Jun
(7) |
Jul
(7) |
Aug
(4) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
|
Nov
(6) |
Dec
(2) |
| 2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
(4) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(10) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
|
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
(5) |
Dec
|
| 2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(2) |
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(5) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2013 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: <sa...@ER...> - 2007-12-05 05:04:02
|
Hi eric Yes, UA->OSBC->SIPX->OSBC->ITSP. In our case we are using sip truck as gateway. ITSP have different Invite requirement mainly attributed to their security concerns. Good luck with your guide Warren Kreckler ----- Original Message ----- From: "eric hernaez" <er...@so...> To: <ope...@li...> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:55 PM Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] INVITE and multi via: > > > jo...@op... wrote: > > Hi Warren, > > > > If the call flow is Caller->sipX->SBC->ITSP, then OpenSBC would have > > just sent a single via. Is your call flow Caller->SBC->sipX->ITSP? > > > > > > We are working on publishing a How To guide for using OSBC with SIPX. > But until that is ready, think about using SIPX as a gateway for all > PSTN-bound calls so that the call flow would be as follows: > UA->OSBC->SIPX->OSBC->ITSP. > > Since OSBC will be proxying the media for NAT traversal in most cases, > having OSBC as a single IP address (for both signaling and media) known > to your ITSP will simplify their configuration as well. > > > > Joegen > > > > sales@ER wrote: > > > >> Hi > >> > >> Our ITSP can accept only 1 Via statement in an INVITE. The INVITE when it > >> reaches the SBC has an entry from the phone and two from sipx. I cannot find > >> any documentation about an option to remove Via Headers. > >> > >> Warren Kreckler > >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel |
|
From: eric h. <er...@so...> - 2007-12-05 04:59:59
|
Correction... eric hernaez wrote: > jo...@op... wrote: > >> Hi Warren, >> >> If the call flow is Caller->sipX->SBC->ITSP, then OpenSBC would have >> just sent a single via. Is your call flow Caller->SBC->sipX->ITSP? >> >> >> > > We are working on publishing a How To guide for using OSBC with SIPX. > But until that is ready, think about using SIPX as a gateway for all > PSTN-bound calls so that the call flow would be as follows: > UA->OSBC->SIPX->OSBC->ITSP. > > I meant to write: think about using OSBC as a gateway for all PSTN-bound calls > Since OSBC will be proxying the media for NAT traversal in most cases, > having OSBC as a single IP address (for both signaling and media) known > to your ITSP will simplify their configuration as well. > > > > |
|
From: <sa...@ER...> - 2007-12-05 04:52:40
|
332415:31:42.035 DBG: [CID=0x06eb] INVITE sip:3277096@204.16.99.202;transport=udp;user=phone SIP/2.0 332415:31:42.035 DBG: [CID=0x06eb] From: "warren kreckler" <sip:773...@si...>;tag=9d0541d4bf80e258 332415:31:42.035 DBG: [CID=0x06eb] To: <sip:32...@si...;user=phone> 332415:31:42.035 DBG: [CID=0x06eb] Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 69.98.187.241:5080;branch=z9hG4bK-7c7323b52db90a047a77417f3acbb045 332415:31:42.035 DBG: [CID=0x06eb] Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 69.98.187.241;branch=z9hG4bK-fe93ff6b4b3aaa12dd017652ff4952c1 332415:31:42.035 DBG: [CID=0x06eb] Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 69.98.187.240:5060;iid=2562;branch=z9hG4bK3c36138422a0dc11936990b82ee269d3-9 07ceb9e2698906b33bcd9a029bcd8de;uas-addr=69.98.187.241;rport=5060 332415:31:42.035 DBG: [CID=0x06eb] Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 69.98.187.226;branch=z9hG4bK6ea99cc86b68e1a7;rport=5060;received=69.38.187.2 26 332415:31:42.035 DBG: [CID=0x06eb] CSeq: 21659 INVITE ----- Original Message ----- From: "jo...@op..." <joe...@gm...> To: <ope...@li...> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 10:21 PM Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] INVITE and multi via: > Hi Warren, > > If the call flow is Caller->sipX->SBC->ITSP, then OpenSBC would have > just sent a single via. Is your call flow Caller->SBC->sipX->ITSP? > > Joegen > > sales@ER wrote: > > Hi > > > > Our ITSP can accept only 1 Via statement in an INVITE. The INVITE when it > > reaches the SBC has an entry from the phone and two from sipx. I cannot find > > any documentation about an option to remove Via Headers. > > > > Warren Kreckler > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Joegen E. Baclor" <joe...@gm...> > > To: <ope...@li...> > > Cc: <jo...@op...> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:02 PM > > Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] INVITE and multi via: > > > > > > > >> Vias are inserted by proxies so that they remain in the signaling path > >> for responses. So unless you wan't to open a really big can of worms > >> by removing vias inserted by proxies it is not a good idea. If your > >> question was how to remove the vias programatically then thats > >> definitely doable. > >> > >> Via via; > >> invite.GetViaAt( via, 0 ); > >> invite.RemoveAllVias(); > >> invite.AppendVia( via ); > >> > >> sales@ER wrote: > >> > >>> Hi > >>> > >>> Is there a way to eliminate all but one VIA in the INVITE? > >>> > >>> Warren Kreckler > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > >>> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > >>> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > >>> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> opensipstack-devel mailing list > >>> ope...@li... > >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > >> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > >> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > >> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> opensipstack-devel mailing list > >> ope...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > > _______________________________________________ > > opensipstack-devel mailing list > > ope...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel |
|
From: eric h. <er...@so...> - 2007-12-05 04:50:32
|
jo...@op... wrote: > Hi Warren, > > If the call flow is Caller->sipX->SBC->ITSP, then OpenSBC would have > just sent a single via. Is your call flow Caller->SBC->sipX->ITSP? > > We are working on publishing a How To guide for using OSBC with SIPX. But until that is ready, think about using SIPX as a gateway for all PSTN-bound calls so that the call flow would be as follows: UA->OSBC->SIPX->OSBC->ITSP. Since OSBC will be proxying the media for NAT traversal in most cases, having OSBC as a single IP address (for both signaling and media) known to your ITSP will simplify their configuration as well. > Joegen > > sales@ER wrote: > >> Hi >> >> Our ITSP can accept only 1 Via statement in an INVITE. The INVITE when it >> reaches the SBC has an entry from the phone and two from sipx. I cannot find >> any documentation about an option to remove Via Headers. >> >> Warren Kreckler >> >> > |
|
From: <jo...@op...> - 2007-12-05 04:21:04
|
Hi Warren, If the call flow is Caller->sipX->SBC->ITSP, then OpenSBC would have just sent a single via. Is your call flow Caller->SBC->sipX->ITSP? Joegen sales@ER wrote: > Hi > > Our ITSP can accept only 1 Via statement in an INVITE. The INVITE when it > reaches the SBC has an entry from the phone and two from sipx. I cannot find > any documentation about an option to remove Via Headers. > > Warren Kreckler > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Joegen E. Baclor" <joe...@gm...> > To: <ope...@li...> > Cc: <jo...@op...> > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:02 PM > Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] INVITE and multi via: > > > >> Vias are inserted by proxies so that they remain in the signaling path >> for responses. So unless you wan't to open a really big can of worms >> by removing vias inserted by proxies it is not a good idea. If your >> question was how to remove the vias programatically then thats >> definitely doable. >> >> Via via; >> invite.GetViaAt( via, 0 ); >> invite.RemoveAllVias(); >> invite.AppendVia( via ); >> >> sales@ER wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> Is there a way to eliminate all but one VIA in the INVITE? >>> >>> Warren Kreckler >>> >>> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper >>> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going >>> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. >>> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> opensipstack-devel mailing list >>> ope...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel >>> >>> >>> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper >> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going >> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. >> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 >> _______________________________________________ >> opensipstack-devel mailing list >> ope...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > > |
|
From: <sa...@ER...> - 2007-12-05 04:15:49
|
Hi Our ITSP can accept only 1 Via statement in an INVITE. The INVITE when it reaches the SBC has an entry from the phone and two from sipx. I cannot find any documentation about an option to remove Via Headers. Warren Kreckler ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joegen E. Baclor" <joe...@gm...> To: <ope...@li...> Cc: <jo...@op...> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:02 PM Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] INVITE and multi via: > Vias are inserted by proxies so that they remain in the signaling path > for responses. So unless you wan't to open a really big can of worms > by removing vias inserted by proxies it is not a good idea. If your > question was how to remove the vias programatically then thats > definitely doable. > > Via via; > invite.GetViaAt( via, 0 ); > invite.RemoveAllVias(); > invite.AppendVia( via ); > > sales@ER wrote: > > Hi > > > > Is there a way to eliminate all but one VIA in the INVITE? > > > > Warren Kreckler > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > > _______________________________________________ > > opensipstack-devel mailing list > > ope...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel |
|
From: <sa...@ER...> - 2007-12-05 04:13:39
|
Hi Our ITSP can accept only 1 Via statement in an INVITE. The INVITE when it reaches the SBC has an entry from the phone and two from sipx. I cannot find any documentation about an option to remove Via Headers. Warren Kreckler ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joegen E. Baclor" <joe...@gm...> To: <ope...@li...> Cc: <jo...@op...> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:02 PM Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] INVITE and multi via: > Vias are inserted by proxies so that they remain in the signaling path > for responses. So unless you wan't to open a really big can of worms > by removing vias inserted by proxies it is not a good idea. If your > question was how to remove the vias programatically then thats > definitely doable. > > Via via; > invite.GetViaAt( via, 0 ); > invite.RemoveAllVias(); > invite.AppendVia( via ); > > sales@ER wrote: > > Hi > > > > Is there a way to eliminate all but one VIA in the INVITE? > > > > Warren Kreckler > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > > _______________________________________________ > > opensipstack-devel mailing list > > ope...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel |
|
From: <sa...@ER...> - 2007-12-05 04:12:14
|
Hi Our ITSP can accept only 1 Via statement in an INVITE. The INVITE when it reaches the SBC has an entry from the phone and two from sipx. I cannot find any documentation about an option to remove Via Headers. Warren Kreckler ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joegen E. Baclor" <joe...@gm...> To: <ope...@li...> Cc: <jo...@op...> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:02 PM Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] INVITE and multi via: > Vias are inserted by proxies so that they remain in the signaling path > for responses. So unless you wan't to open a really big can of worms > by removing vias inserted by proxies it is not a good idea. If your > question was how to remove the vias programatically then thats > definitely doable. > > Via via; > invite.GetViaAt( via, 0 ); > invite.RemoveAllVias(); > invite.AppendVia( via ); > > sales@ER wrote: > > Hi > > > > Is there a way to eliminate all but one VIA in the INVITE? > > > > Warren Kreckler > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > > _______________________________________________ > > opensipstack-devel mailing list > > ope...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel |
|
From: Joegen E. B. <joe...@gm...> - 2007-12-05 03:02:26
|
Vias are inserted by proxies so that they remain in the signaling path for responses. So unless you wan't to open a really big can of worms by removing vias inserted by proxies it is not a good idea. If your question was how to remove the vias programatically then thats definitely doable. Via via; invite.GetViaAt( via, 0 ); invite.RemoveAllVias(); invite.AppendVia( via ); sales@ER wrote: > Hi > > Is there a way to eliminate all but one VIA in the INVITE? > > Warren Kreckler > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > |
|
From: <sa...@ER...> - 2007-12-05 02:38:24
|
Hi Is there a way to eliminate all but one VIA in the INVITE? Warren Kreckler |
|
From: Joegen E. B. <joe...@gm...> - 2007-12-04 16:19:02
|
Hi Everyone, I have added a new configuration section "Host Access List" for OpenSBC that allows only certain IP address to send calls to OpenSBC. It can accept a list of single IP addresses or a network block. There are only two parameters in this page 1. Trust All Hosts - Flag whether OpenSBC would accept INVITEs from ANY host from the internet. If this flag is set to TRUE OpenSBC will only accept calls from the IP Addresses or Range listed. 2. Hosts - Entry for host can be a single IP Address or a range. Example: 192.168.0.1 or 10.0.0.1-10.0.0.255 If the Access List is enabled and a call came in from an unknown host, OpenSBC will answer with a forbidden with a Warning header. A sample of such response is below: SIP/2.0 403 Forbidden From: "unknown" <sip:20...@pb...>;tag=172561562940 To: <sip:10...@pb...>;tag=de055ec348fa18109fd8d5d74376c6ed Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.0.0.1:1000;iid=5050;branch=z9hG4bKc0a800990000005847557d8900000c8200000117;rport=1000;received=192.168.120.1 CSeq: 1 INVITE Call-ID: E7335922-1B42-4670-817A-EE1FEFC337EC@192.168.0.153 Server: OpenSIPStack-1.1.7-18 Warning: 399 192.168.120.1 Is Not Allowed In Our Access List Content-Length: 0 Joegen |
|
From: Joegen E. B. <joe...@gm...> - 2007-12-04 16:11:23
|
Good suggestion. I think the best place to put this code is as a static
method in OSSApplication. Something like
OSSApplication::CreateUserFolder() with similar behavior in linux and
window. For linux, it would be create in the $(HOME) directory. For
windows, it would be Document and Settings. Aside from the registry
folder, we have the logs and CALEA folders that are also dynamically
created by OpenSBC. A central function would benefit these two as
well. Would you be able to patch OSSApplicaiton with this method and
behave the same way in linux and windows? I will be glad to add it as
your contribution.
H.Kropf wrote:
> I suggest to use the following code:for Win NT / 2k / XP
>
> //--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> // uses c:\Documents and Settings\[User]\OSS\registry\
> //--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> char dir[MAX_PATH+1];
> SecureZeroMemory(dir, sizeof(dir));
>
> SHGetSpecialFolderPath(NULL, (LPSTR)dir, CSIDL_APPDATA, TRUE);
>
> PathAppend(dir, "OSS");
> if( !PathFileExists( dir ) ) _mkdir((LPCSTR)dir);
> PathAppend(dir, "registry");
> if( !PathFileExists( pb_path ) ) _mkdir(dir);
> //--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> instead of
>
> //--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> // uses c:\Program Files\[program name]\registry\ . Whether the user
> has the rights to create this folder here?
> //--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OString dir = PProcess::Current().GetFile().GetDirectory() + "registry";
> if( !PFile::Exists( dir.c_str() ) )
> PDirectory::Create( dir.c_str() );
> //--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> in
>
> //======== RegisterSessionManager.cxx ========
>
> RegistrationDatabase::RegistrationDatabase()
> {
> #if HAS_CPPSQLITE
> m_HasContactRecovery = PrepareContactRecoveryDB(
> "ContactRecovery.sqlite" );
> #else
> m_HasContactRecovery = TRUE;
> OString dir = PProcess::Current().GetFile().GetDirectory() + "registry";
> if( !PFile::Exists( dir.c_str() ) )
> PDirectory::Create( dir.c_str() );
> m_RegRecoveryDIR = dir.c_str();
> #endif
> }
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
> _______________________________________________
> opensipstack-devel mailing list
> ope...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel
>
>
>
|
|
From: H.Kropf <mai...@gl...> - 2007-12-04 14:36:04
|
I suggest to use the following code:for Win NT / 2k / XP
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------
// uses c:\Documents and Settings\[User]\OSS\registry\
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------
char dir[MAX_PATH+1];
SecureZeroMemory(dir, sizeof(dir));
SHGetSpecialFolderPath(NULL, (LPSTR)dir, CSIDL_APPDATA, TRUE);
PathAppend(dir, "OSS");
if( !PathFileExists( dir ) ) _mkdir((LPCSTR)dir);
PathAppend(dir, "registry");
if( !PathFileExists( pb_path ) ) _mkdir(dir);
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------
instead of
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------
// uses c:\Program Files\[program name]\registry\ . Whether the user
has the rights to create this folder here?
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------
OString dir = PProcess::Current().GetFile().GetDirectory() + "registry";
if( !PFile::Exists( dir.c_str() ) )
PDirectory::Create( dir.c_str() );
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------
in
//======== RegisterSessionManager.cxx ========
RegistrationDatabase::RegistrationDatabase()
{
#if HAS_CPPSQLITE
m_HasContactRecovery = PrepareContactRecoveryDB(
"ContactRecovery.sqlite" );
#else
m_HasContactRecovery = TRUE;
OString dir = PProcess::Current().GetFile().GetDirectory() + "registry";
if( !PFile::Exists( dir.c_str() ) )
PDirectory::Create( dir.c_str() );
m_RegRecoveryDIR = dir.c_str();
#endif
}
|
|
From: Joegen E. B. <joe...@gm...> - 2007-12-04 13:31:10
|
PXML is a wrapper around expat. Expat is a NONE validating parser. It's the trade off for simplicity and speed. Dinesh Dialani wrote: > Hi Joegen, > > I am using PXML.h file to parse an XML file but I also want to > validate it against XML Schema. > > Is there any function to validate XML file against XML schema in OpenSBC? > > Thanks > > Dinesh > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Opensipstack-osbcdevel mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-osbcdevel > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.13/1169 - Release Date: 12/3/2007 10:56 PM > |
|
From: Ilian J. C. P. <ip...@so...> - 2007-12-04 07:22:12
|
Everyone, The final patch for 100rel/PRACK support is now available from CVS. It should be working by now. Ilian Joegen E. Baclor wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I just want to warn everybody who downloaded source codes from > yesterdays CVS head up to this time that a partial patch has been > committed to CVS related to reliable provisional response (RFC 3262) > support. The said patch is known to crash the IST FSM and is not safe > for production use. I should be able to provide the final stable patch > within the next 24 hours. > > Joegen > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > |
|
From: Joegen E. B. <joe...@gm...> - 2007-12-04 02:19:56
|
Hi Everyone, I just want to warn everybody who downloaded source codes from yesterdays CVS head up to this time that a partial patch has been committed to CVS related to reliable provisional response (RFC 3262) support. The said patch is known to crash the IST FSM and is not safe for production use. I should be able to provide the final stable patch within the next 24 hours. Joegen |
|
From: voice <vo...@ne...> - 2007-12-03 14:15:28
|
Hi Support for MySQL would be nice alternative and perhaps a plug-in port for etherreal/Firewire type analyzer to read the Logs could be very useful. Warren Kreckler ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joegen E. Baclor" <joe...@gm...> To: <ope...@li...>; <ope...@li...> Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 9:42 PM Subject: [OpenSIPStack] An enhanced HTTP Config Module for OpenSBC > Hi Everyone, > > As I have hinted in the past, there is a plan to provide a new level of > administrative interface for OpenSBC. As most of you might have > discovered by now, OpenSBC is very easy to install and requires > virtually no configuration for you to be able to run and use it. This > is all because of a built-in HTTP server that allows for OpenSBC to be > configured remotely. However, since version 1.1.4 and with the > introduction of more advanced features like SIP Trunking, the built-in > HTTP Config Pages is out-growing its simplicity. We are now in a > point where we need to decide what technology to use to bring the > configuration modules to the next level. We need to seriously > consider the following criteria in choosing the solution. > > 1. It should be very easy to install and package > 2. Built-in access to back-end databases preferably Postgress > 3. Must be able to host Dynamic HTML Content > 4. Other criteria that might be useful are support for XML-RPC and SOAP > > > Some of the basic choices that I pulled out straight from my thoughts are > > 1. A separate web interface easily installable as standard Apache Web > application. Choices are PHP, JSP Ruby with SQL back-end > 2. Stand-alone Python HTTP Server just like the trac project. See > http://trac.edgewall.org/ > 3. Enhance the HTTP Admin to support Fast-CGI extension to allow for > dynamic HTTP content to be hosted straight by OpenSBC > > I would want to hear from everyone if you are leaning towards a certain > approach or would want another approach altogether. > > Joegen > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > |
|
From: Thomas R. <tho...@it...> - 2007-12-03 08:17:25
|
Standalone Python server like Trac and/or Twisted.web+woven sounds good to = me ;) Just my 2c though -----Original Message----- From: ope...@li... [mailto:opensipstack= -de...@li...] On Behalf Of Joegen E. Baclor Sent: Montag, 03. Dezember 2007 04:43 To: ope...@li...; opensipstack-osbcdevel@lists.= sourceforge.net Subject: [OpenSIPStack] An enhanced HTTP Config Module for OpenSBC Hi Everyone, As I have hinted in the past, there is a plan to provide a new level of administrative interface for OpenSBC. As most of you might have discovered by now, OpenSBC is very easy to install and requires virtually no configuration for you to be able to run and use it. This is all because of a built-in HTTP server that allows for OpenSBC to be configured remotely. However, since version 1.1.4 and with the introduction of more advanced features like SIP Trunking, the built-in HTTP Config Pages is out-growing its simplicity. We are now in a point where we need to decide what technology to use to bring the configuration modules to the next level. We need to seriously consider the following criteria in choosing the solution. 1. It should be very easy to install and package 2. Built-in access to back-end databases preferably Postgress 3. Must be able to host Dynamic HTML Content 4. Other criteria that might be useful are support for XML-RPC and SOAP Some of the basic choices that I pulled out straight from my thoughts are 1. A separate web interface easily installable as standard Apache Web application. Choices are PHP, JSP Ruby with SQL back-end 2. Stand-alone Python HTTP Server just like the trac project. See http://trac.edgewall.org/ 3. Enhance the HTTP Admin to support Fast-CGI extension to allow for dynamic HTTP content to be hosted straight by OpenSBC I would want to hear from everyone if you are leaning towards a certain approach or would want another approach altogether. Joegen ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 _______________________________________________ opensipstack-devel mailing list ope...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel |
|
From: Joegen E. B. <joe...@gm...> - 2007-12-03 03:42:54
|
Hi Everyone, As I have hinted in the past, there is a plan to provide a new level of administrative interface for OpenSBC. As most of you might have discovered by now, OpenSBC is very easy to install and requires virtually no configuration for you to be able to run and use it. This is all because of a built-in HTTP server that allows for OpenSBC to be configured remotely. However, since version 1.1.4 and with the introduction of more advanced features like SIP Trunking, the built-in HTTP Config Pages is out-growing its simplicity. We are now in a point where we need to decide what technology to use to bring the configuration modules to the next level. We need to seriously consider the following criteria in choosing the solution. 1. It should be very easy to install and package 2. Built-in access to back-end databases preferably Postgress 3. Must be able to host Dynamic HTML Content 4. Other criteria that might be useful are support for XML-RPC and SOAP Some of the basic choices that I pulled out straight from my thoughts are 1. A separate web interface easily installable as standard Apache Web application. Choices are PHP, JSP Ruby with SQL back-end 2. Stand-alone Python HTTP Server just like the trac project. See http://trac.edgewall.org/ 3. Enhance the HTTP Admin to support Fast-CGI extension to allow for dynamic HTTP content to be hosted straight by OpenSBC I would want to hear from everyone if you are leaning towards a certain approach or would want another approach altogether. Joegen |
|
From: Joegen E. B. <joe...@gm...> - 2007-12-03 00:50:03
|
I can assure you that HTTP Admin maybe accesses from anywhere in the internet as long as the host where OpenSBC is installed allow remote connection to the http port (TCP 9999). You might want to look at the possibility that this is a firewall/security issue rather than a software issue. sales@ER wrote: > Hi > > Yes i understand that. From three different location in the USA thousands > of miles apart and we can't access. One doc i read it states from the > computer that opensbc is installed on, which i take to mean literally. But > i do remember in the last version before this latest update i was able to > access from a network computer. I know it does not make sense but there you > are. I am using the CVS lastest from last Wednesday. > > Warren Kreckler > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "jo...@op..." <joe...@gm...> > To: <ope...@li...> > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 6:38 PM > Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] Web Interface Question > > > >> I am not very sure if I get your question right but the web interface of >> OpenSBC is accessible from any computer in the network via HTTP port >> 9999 of the IP address of where OpenSBC is installed >> >> http://opensbc_ip_address:9999 >> >> Please give more information if this is not what you meant. >> >> Joegen >> >> sales@ER wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> How do i chage opensbc so i can use the web interface from any computer >>> > on > >>> or off the network >>> >>> Warren Kreckler >>> >>> >>> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper >>> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going >>> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. >>> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> opensipstack-devel mailing list >>> ope...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper >> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going >> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. >> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 >> _______________________________________________ >> opensipstack-devel mailing list >> ope...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > |
|
From: <sa...@ER...> - 2007-12-02 12:23:51
|
Hi Yes i understand that. From three different location in the USA thousands of miles apart and we can't access. One doc i read it states from the computer that opensbc is installed on, which i take to mean literally. But i do remember in the last version before this latest update i was able to access from a network computer. I know it does not make sense but there you are. I am using the CVS lastest from last Wednesday. Warren Kreckler ----- Original Message ----- From: "jo...@op..." <joe...@gm...> To: <ope...@li...> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 6:38 PM Subject: Re: [OpenSIPStack] Web Interface Question > I am not very sure if I get your question right but the web interface of > OpenSBC is accessible from any computer in the network via HTTP port > 9999 of the IP address of where OpenSBC is installed > > http://opensbc_ip_address:9999 > > Please give more information if this is not what you meant. > > Joegen > > sales@ER wrote: > > Hi > > > > How do i chage opensbc so i can use the web interface from any computer on > > or off the network > > > > Warren Kreckler > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > > _______________________________________________ > > opensipstack-devel mailing list > > ope...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel |
|
From: <jo...@op...> - 2007-12-02 00:38:41
|
I am not very sure if I get your question right but the web interface of OpenSBC is accessible from any computer in the network via HTTP port 9999 of the IP address of where OpenSBC is installed http://opensbc_ip_address:9999 Please give more information if this is not what you meant. Joegen sales@ER wrote: > Hi > > How do i chage opensbc so i can use the web interface from any computer on > or off the network > > Warren Kreckler > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > > |
|
From: <sa...@ER...> - 2007-12-01 18:33:49
|
Hi How do i chage opensbc so i can use the web interface from any computer on or off the network Warren Kreckler |
|
From: Joegen E. B. <joe...@gm...> - 2007-12-01 08:30:03
|
Based on the logs, you are still using a version that did not let the request-uri pass through. Recent changes has ammended this behavior and B2BUA routes now honor not only the To-URI to be routes but the request-URI as well. Please upgrade using CVS head. Dinesh Dialani wrote: > Hi Joegen, > > > > On Nov 30, 2007 7:35 AM, Joegen E. Baclor <joe...@gm... > <mailto:joe...@gm...>> wrote: > > Gaurav, > > Have you already tried manually specifying a route in B2BUA Routes? > > [sip:206...@si... > <mailto:sip:206...@si...>] > sip:your_internal_ua@internal_domain > > > I put > > [sip:206...@si... > <mailto:sip:206...@si...>] sip:102@192.168.96.123 > <mailto:sip:102@192.168.96.123> > > in B2BUA Routes but it does not work and sends a 404 Not Found sip > packet. > > > > > > If this did not work, please send me your b2bua logs off list > > > I am attaching b2bua logs here with. > > > Thanks > > Dinesh > > > > > Joegen > > Gaurav Kheterpal wrote: > > Hi Joegen, > > > > Thanks for your reply. The request URI in INVITE is > > sip:206...@si... > <mailto:sip:206...@si...>. > > > > Any suggestions? > > > > Regards, > > Gaurav > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: ope...@li... > <mailto:ope...@li...> > >> [mailto:ope...@li... > <mailto:ope...@li...>] On > Behalf Of > >> Joegen E. Baclor > >> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 2:37 PM > >> To: ope...@li... > <mailto:ope...@li...> > >> Cc: ope...@li... > <mailto:ope...@li...> > >> Subject: Re: [OpenSBC] Trunking/ DID - To URI > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> I fully understand the problem. What's the request-URI? Is it > >> ***sip:555...@si... > <mailto:sip:555...@si...> > >> To=sip:5553885283@sip3.voipvoip > <mailto:sip:5553885283@sip3.voipvoip>. > >> com>* > >> like the invite below? > >> > >> INVITE ***sip:555...@si... > <mailto:sip:555...@si...> > >> To=sip:5553885283@sip3.voipvoip > <mailto:sip:5553885283@sip3.voipvoip>. > >> com>* > >> SIP/2.0 > >> To: sip:12069220355*@sip3.voipvoip.com > <mailto:sip:12069220355*@sip3.voipvoip.com> > >> > >> Joegen > >> > >> > >> > >> Gaurav Kheterpal wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Joegen, > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I trust you are doing fine. While continuing to explore the > trunking > >>> feature of OpenSBC with various SIP providers, we ran in to the > >>> following issue:- > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> While testing with voipviop.com <http://voipviop.com>, The AOR > of our account in > >>> voipvoip.com <http://voipvoip.com> <http://voipvoip.com> is > >>> > >>> * sip:555...@si... > <mailto:sip:555...@si...> > >>> > >>> > >> > <http://us.f524.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=sip:5553885283@sip3.voipvoip > <http://us.f524.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=sip:5553885283@sip3.voipvoip>. > >> com> > >> > >>> *and voipvoip.com <http://voipvoip.com> <http://voipvoip.com> > proxy registers OpenSBC with > >>> above SIP URI. But voipvoip.com <http://voipvoip.com> > <http://voipvoip.com> has allocated > >>> DID 12069220355 for this particular AOR and all the incoming > calls > >>> coming to OpenSBC have SIP TO URI as > >>> > >>> To: <sip:206...@si... > <mailto:sip:206...@si...> > >>> > >>> > >> < > http://us.f524.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=sip:2069220355@sip3.voipvoip. > >> com>>. > >> > >>> Now the problem is that when an inbound call comes in, the code > >>> searches for UserName: 2069220355 and tries to get SipTrunkAccount > >>> object but it fails as UserName is 5553885283 on Sip Trunk > Config Page. > >>> > >>> Here is snippet from the code. > >>> > >>> SBCRoutingHandler::B2BRouteCall() > >>> > >>> { > >>> SBCSIPTrunkAccount account; > >>> account.SetUserName( > to.GetURI().GetUser().c_str() ); > >>> if( trunkReg->FindTrunkAccount( account ) ) > >>> { > >>> ///ok we have an account > >>> uri = SIPURI( account.GetInboundRoute() ); > >>> } > >>> } > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Any suggestions on how we can get the DID into account for > trunking? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> As always, thanks in advance for your reply. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Gaurav > >>> > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> > >> - > >> > >>> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business > White Paper > >>> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > >>> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > >>> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Opensipstack-osbcdevel mailing list > >>> Ope...@li... > <mailto:Ope...@li...> > >>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-osbcdevel > >>> > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > >>> > >>> No virus found in this incoming message. > >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.9/1155 - Release Date: > >>> > >> 11/27/2007 8:30 PM > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business > White Paper > >> from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > >> mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > >> http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Opensipstack-osbcdevel mailing list > >> Ope...@li... > <mailto:Ope...@li...> > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-osbcdevel > >> > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White > Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > <http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4> > _______________________________________________ > Opensipstack-osbcdevel mailing list > Ope...@li... > <mailto:Ope...@li...> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-osbcdevel > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.10/1160 - Release Date: 11/29/2007 8:32 PM |
|
From: Joegen E. B. <joe...@gm...> - 2007-12-01 08:07:06
|
Look for the "Trusted Domains" section in the Config Pages. Put a check on the "Accept All Calls" box or you may add the domain of SIPX in the trusted domain list. hth Joegen sales@ER wrote: > Hi > > OpenSBC is NOT allowing the INVITE from a phone registered on SIPxchange to pass through it > because it is attempting to authenticate the user who made the call (From:). > We need to make some configuration changes on OpenSBC before the INVITE will > be passed to our ITSP. > > Can you show me how to do this? > > > Warren Kreckler > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper > from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going > mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. > http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 > _______________________________________________ > opensipstack-devel mailing list > ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-devel > > > |
18 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
