Hi all, yesterday I start to experiment with FreeSWITCH and IPV6 and first what I saw is segfault :-) 1. I'm using FreeSWITCH 1.0.trunk (10479) runnig one of Sofia profiles on IPv6 (sip and rtp) on Centos 5.2, 32 bit. 2. As client phone I try Sip Communicator on WinXP, 32 bit. (BTW: Do you know some other soft phone supporting IPv6?) 3. When soft phone send REGISTER (mupltiply times, I really don't know why :-), FS responds 100, 401 and on second run also 200 OK. And as soon as 200 OK is sent, FreeSWITCH dies with segmentation fault. Could someone, please, tell me, what should I do to properly report this issue? Or, may be, I am missing something. Any help is very welcome :-) Best regards, kokoska.rokoska
Including a backtrace of the segfault would be most helpful... do you have it? /b On Nov 20, 2008, at 2:21 PM, kokoska rokoska wrote:
Hi all,
yesterday I start to experiment with FreeSWITCH and IPV6 and first what I saw is segfault :-)
1. I'm using FreeSWITCH 1.0.trunk (10479) runnig one of Sofia profiles on IPv6 (sip and rtp) on Centos 5.2, 32 bit.
2. As client phone I try Sip Communicator on WinXP, 32 bit. (BTW: Do you know some other soft phone supporting IPv6?)
3. When soft phone send REGISTER (mupltiply times, I really don't know why :-), FS responds 100, 401 and on second run also 200 OK. And as soon as 200 OK is sent, FreeSWITCH dies with segmentation fault.
Could someone, please, tell me, what should I do to properly report this issue? Or, may be, I am missing something. Any help is very welcome :-)
Best regards,
Brian West napsal(a):
Including a backtrace of the segfault would be most helpful... do you have it?
I'm sorry, but I have no idea how to get backtrace :-) If you point me to some "howto" I catch it very quickly because the segfault is reproducable. Thanks, regards, kokoska.rokoska
http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Debugging_Freeswitch#Getting_a_Backtrace /b On Nov 20, 2008, at 3:32 PM, kokoska rokoska wrote:
Brian West napsal(a):
Including a backtrace of the segfault would be most helpful... do you have it?
I'm sorry, but I have no idea how to get backtrace :-) If you point me to some "howto" I catch it very quickly because the segfault is reproducable.
Thanks, regards,
kokoska.rokoska
_______________________________________________ Freeswitch-users mailing list Freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
Brian West napsal(a):
http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Debugging_Freeswitch#Getting_a_Backtrace
Thank you very much, Brian, for the link above! I'm not sure if I caught backtrace correctly, but I did what I can :-) The pastebin links: http://pastebin.freeswitch.org/6243 http://pastebin.freeswitch.org/6244 Thanks once more, best regrads kokoska.rokoska
I added some code to protect against this segfault in svn revision 10483, but it seems like you are getting an invalid presence packet. Can you update and test and make sure it doesn't segfault anymore, and paste a sip trace of the message that causes this issue? Mike On Nov 20, 2008, at 5:36 PM, kokoska.rokoska wrote:
Brian West napsal(a):
http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Debugging_Freeswitch#Getting_a_Backtrace
Thank you very much, Brian, for the link above!
I'm not sure if I caught backtrace correctly, but I did what I can :-)
The pastebin links: http://pastebin.freeswitch.org/6243 http://pastebin.freeswitch.org/6244
Michael Jerris napsal(a):
I added some code to protect against this segfault in svn revision 10483, but it seems like you are getting an invalid presence packet. Can you update and test and make sure it doesn't segfault anymore, and paste a sip trace of the message that causes this issue?
Mike
Thank you very much, Mike, for your fix! It looks like it helps. I do more tests tomorow (I am at CET). Presence message is as follows: PUBLISH sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld SIP/2.0 Call-ID: b005315c3d071250ecf07fffa5fff66e@0.0.0.0 CSeq: 1 PUBLISH From: <sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld>;tag=72e3e8d1 To: <sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP [my:ip:6]:5060;branch=z9hG4bK88cce6e78dff940d328b676e13ae321d Max-Forwards: 70 Content-Type: application/pidf+xml Expires: 300 Event: presence User-Agent: SIP Communicator 1.0-alpha3-nightly.build.1519 Windows XP Content-Length: 423 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?><presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf" xmlns:dm="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:data-model" xmlns:rpid="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:rpid" entity="sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld"><dm:person id="p8285"><rpid:activities/></dm:person><tuple id="t1998"><status><basic>open</basic></status><contact>sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld</contact><note>Online</note></tuple></presence> And on pcap dump I see ICMPv6 response unreachable (Port unreachable), but FreeSWITCH works ok and process calls on both IPv4 and even IPv6. Thanks once more! Beste regards, kokoska.rokoska
okay, this confirms my suspicion and that the fix is correct. let us know. Mike On Nov 20, 2008, at 6:37 PM, kokoska.rokoska wrote:
Michael Jerris napsal(a):
I added some code to protect against this segfault in svn revision 10483, but it seems like you are getting an invalid presence packet. Can you update and test and make sure it doesn't segfault anymore, and paste a sip trace of the message that causes this issue?
Mike
Thank you very much, Mike, for your fix!
It looks like it helps. I do more tests tomorow (I am at CET).
Presence message is as follows:
PUBLISH sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld SIP/2.0 Call-ID: b005315c3d071250ecf07fffa5fff66e@0.0.0.0 CSeq: 1 PUBLISH From: <sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld>;tag=72e3e8d1 To: <sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP [my:ip:6]:5060;branch=z9hG4bK88cce6e78dff940d328b676e13ae321d Max-Forwards: 70 Content-Type: application/pidf+xml Expires: 300 Event: presence User-Agent: SIP Communicator 1.0-alpha3-nightly.build.1519 Windows XP Content-Length: 423
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?><presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf" xmlns:dm="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:data-model" xmlns:rpid="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:rpid" entity="sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld"><dm:person id="p8285"><rpid:activities/></dm:person><tuple id="t1998"><status><basic>open</basic></status><contact>sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld </contact><note>Online</note></tuple></presence>
And on pcap dump I see ICMPv6 response unreachable (Port unreachable), but FreeSWITCH works ok and process calls on both IPv4 and even IPv6.
Hi, I have tested all I can and everything worked fine. So many thanks once more for very quick fix! BTW: Could some with better presence knowledge tell me what is wrong with that message? I like to report it to the Sip Communicator devels... Best regards, kokoska.rokoska Michael Jerris napsal(a):
okay, this confirms my suspicion and that the fix is correct. let us know.
Mike
On Nov 20, 2008, at 6:37 PM, kokoska.rokoska wrote:
Michael Jerris napsal(a):
I added some code to protect against this segfault in svn revision 10483, but it seems like you are getting an invalid presence packet. Can you update and test and make sure it doesn't segfault anymore, and paste a sip trace of the message that causes this issue?
Mike
Thank you very much, Mike, for your fix!
It looks like it helps. I do more tests tomorow (I am at CET).
Presence message is as follows:
PUBLISH sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld SIP/2.0 Call-ID: b005315c3d071250ecf07fffa5fff66e@0.0.0.0 CSeq: 1 PUBLISH From: <sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld>;tag=72e3e8d1 To: <sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP [my:ip:6]:5060;branch=z9hG4bK88cce6e78dff940d328b676e13ae321d Max-Forwards: 70 Content-Type: application/pidf+xml Expires: 300 Event: presence User-Agent: SIP Communicator 1.0-alpha3-nightly.build.1519 Windows XP Content-Length: 423
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?><presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf" xmlns:dm="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:data-model" xmlns:rpid="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:rpid" entity="sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld"><dm:person id="p8285"><rpid:activities/></dm:person><tuple id="t1998"><status><basic>open</basic></status><contact>sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld </contact><note>Online</note></tuple></presence>
And on pcap dump I see ICMPv6 response unreachable (Port unreachable), but FreeSWITCH works ok and process calls on both IPv4 and even IPv6.
_______________________________________________ Freeswitch-users mailing list Freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
I am not sure if it is technically wrong according to the spec, probably not, but every other phone that supports this method would have actual data instead of the blank activities tag. <rpid:activities/> Mike On Nov 21, 2008, at 3:57 AM, kokoska rokoska wrote:
Hi,
I have tested all I can and everything worked fine. So many thanks once more for very quick fix!
BTW: Could some with better presence knowledge tell me what is wrong with that message? I like to report it to the Sip Communicator devels...
Best regards,
kokoska.rokoska
Michael Jerris napsal(a):
okay, this confirms my suspicion and that the fix is correct. let us know.
Mike
On Nov 20, 2008, at 6:37 PM, kokoska.rokoska wrote:
Michael Jerris napsal(a):
I added some code to protect against this segfault in svn revision 10483, but it seems like you are getting an invalid presence packet. Can you update and test and make sure it doesn't segfault anymore, and paste a sip trace of the message that causes this issue?
Mike
Thank you very much, Mike, for your fix!
It looks like it helps. I do more tests tomorow (I am at CET).
Presence message is as follows:
PUBLISH sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld SIP/2.0 Call-ID: b005315c3d071250ecf07fffa5fff66e@0.0.0.0 CSeq: 1 PUBLISH From: <sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld>;tag=72e3e8d1 To: <sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP [my:ip:6]:5060;branch=z9hG4bK88cce6e78dff940d328b676e13ae321d Max-Forwards: 70 Content-Type: application/pidf+xml Expires: 300 Event: presence User-Agent: SIP Communicator 1.0-alpha3-nightly.build.1519 Windows XP Content-Length: 423
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?><presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf" xmlns:dm="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:data-model" xmlns:rpid="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:rpid" entity="sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld"><dm:person id="p8285"><rpid:activities/></dm:person><tuple id="t1998"><status><basic>open</basic></status><contact>sip:0002*25@ip6.server.tld </contact><note>Online</note></tuple></presence>
And on pcap dump I see ICMPv6 response unreachable (Port unreachable), but FreeSWITCH works ok and process calls on both IPv4 and even IPv6.
Michael Jerris napsal(a):
I am not sure if it is technically wrong according to the spec, probably not, but every other phone that supports this method would have actual data instead of the blank activities tag.
<rpid:activities/>
Mike
Thank you very much, Mike, for your explanation! Best regards, kokoska.rokoska
participants (4)
-
Brian West
-
kokoska rokoska
-
kokoska.rokoska
-
Michael Jerris