[Freeswitch-users] No NOTIFY MWI when registering via proxy.

[Michael Jerris]

Following up, did a bug get created for this issue?

Mike

On Sep 5, 2009, at 2:40 AM, mayamatakeshi wrote:

>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:28 PM, mayamatakeshi  
> <mayamatakeshi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 7:59 PM, mayamatakeshi  
> <mayamatakeshi at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm testing FS support for the header Path (FS is behind opensips).
> It pretty much works: I tested calling from one user to the other  
> and calls work perfectly.
> However, I've noticed that when I register my terminal directly with  
> FS without going thru the proxy, I receive an unsolicited NOTIFY  
> containing Message-Waiting information. But when I register via  
> proxy, FS doesn't send this NOTIFY.
> What could be causing this difference of behavior? (enabling debug  
> (F8) doesn't show anything for registration handling).
>
> I have enabled Sofia debug and I can see NTA is complaining about  
> invalid URI when building the NOTIFY:
>
> nua: nua_notify: entering
> nua(0x9b3c1e8): sent signal r_notify
> nua(0x9b3c1e8): recv signal r_notify
> nua: nua_stack_set_params: entering
> nua(0x9b3c1e8): adding notify usage with event message-summary
> nta_leg_tcreate(0x9b74c68)
> nta outgoing create: invalid URI
> nta: outgoing_free(0x9b74928)
> nua(0x9b3c1e8): event r_notify 900 Internal error at nua_client.c:711
> nua(0x9b3c1e8): removing notify usage with event message-summary
>
> My REGISTER relayed by opensips is this:
>
> REGISTER sip:test.com SIP/2.0
> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.2.100;lr=on;ftag=AhFSdiltk3H4mrmGXICgRHFiU59ZuCk5 
> >
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.2.100;branch=z9hG4bKe62c.49e9f6c1.0
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP  
> 192.168.2.121 
> : 
> 5060 
> ;received 
> = 
> 192.168.2.121 
> ;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bKPj4uAYgDuRbilYy4lCWcjlDKIDAtf-9RdS
> Max-Forwards: 69
> From: <sip:user1 at test.com>;tag=AhFSdiltk3H4mrmGXICgRHFiU59ZuCk5
> To: <sip:user1 at test.com>
> Call-ID: JvQ.apMLiJtfHa7z4ShIfgBPi5jIbtBv
> CSeq: 14872 REGISTER
> Contact: <sip:user1 at 192.168.2.121:5060;nat=yes>
> Expires: 60
> Authorization: Digest username="user1", realm="test.com",  
> nonce="7d911eef-2c16-4deb-99f6-afcff9968a19", uri="sip: 
> 192.168.2.100", response="df29caeb78790b4527f1176622cbf192",  
> algorithm=MD5, cnonce="5.EXCbM3RZTx6iOh1cvUzUvEZTs2eheG", qop=auth,  
> nc=00000001
> Content-Length:  0
> Path: <sip:opensips at 192.168.2.100;lr;received=sip:192.168.2.121:5060>
>
> I hope someone can point out a problem.
> I'm looking at NTA with gdb but I'm slow on this.
>
> The invalid URI nta is complaining about is the route_uri extracted  
> from the Contact stored upon registration.
> The difference of behavior between INVITE (works) and NOTIFY  
> (doesn't work) via proxy, seems to be because for INVITE, mod_sofia  
> code (function sofia_glue_do_invite in sofia_glue.c) calls  
> sofia_overcome_sip_uri_weakness to adjust the route_uri.
> But for a NOTIFY, this function is not called (and it cannot be  
> called, as there's no session which is required as a parameter).
>
> In my case I can see that basically what  
> sofia_overcome_sip_uri_weakness does is to remove the "<" , ">"  
> around the route_uri.
> I messed with the code in sofia_glue_send_notify to just remove "<"  
> and ">" and after that I was able to receive the NOTIFY.
> So I believe there is  some code lacking in FS to properly permit  
> UAs registering via proxy to receive NOTIFY.
> I might be wrong: if there is anyone using this scenario  
> successfully, please let me know. Otherwise, I'll open a ticket on  
> JIRA.
>
> regards,
> takeshi
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20090911/db56b7ec/attachment-0002.html