[SR-Users] Double record routes

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello,

do you have mhomed enabled? Are there routes from both IP addresses to
the destination?

IIRC, not that long ago I pointed to some article about linux not
ensuring what would be the local ip used for tcp connections when many
interfaces are having routes to destination. I couldn't find it quickly
now, though.

What you can try is to force advertised address with:

listen=tcp:1.2.3.4:5060 advertise 1.2.3.4:5060

Cheers,
Daniel

On 05/05/15 15:02, Mickael Marrache wrote:
>
> Here, there are 2 interfaces but only the VIP should be used. Also,
> the INVITE exits the same interface it entered (i.e. the VIP) but
> exits with a different source port (because of the TCP connection).
>
>  
>
> I tried disabling double RR, I only see the VIP record route now,
> however I still see the top Via with the non-VIP interface although
> the INVITE is forwarded to the proxy using the VIP interface.
>
>  
>
> *From:*sr-users [mailto:sr-users-bounces at lists.sip-router.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Alex Balashov
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 05, 2015 3:31 PM
> *To:* Mickael Marrache; sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> *Subject:* Re: [SR-Users] Double record routes
>
>  
>
> That is normal behaviour if double RR is enabled in the RR module; two
> Record-Routes will be added if Kamailio is multihomed and the invite
> exits a different interface to the one it entered.
>
>  
>
> --
> Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
> 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300
> Atlanta, GA 30346
> United States
>
> Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct)
> Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry.
>
> *From: *Mickael Marrache
>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, May 5, 2015 08:27
>
> *To: *sr-users at lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users at lists.sip-router.org>
>
> *Reply To: *Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>
> *Subject: *[SR-Users] Double record routes
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
>  
>
> We are adding TCP support to our load balancer and for some reason it
> adds two record route headers.
>
>  
>
> The instance have two IP addresses on which it binds: one if the VIP
> address and the second is the non-VIP address.
>
>  
>
> I explicitly set the tcp_source_ipv4 parameter with the VIP address so
> that it is used as source address for outbound TCP connection.
>
>  
>
> So, we get the following INVITE going from the load balancer to a proxy:
>
>  
>
> T 2015/05/05 12:08:49.715822 VIP:54667 -> PROXY:5060 [AP]
>
> INVITE sip:123 at mycompany.com SIP/2.0.
>
> Record-Route: <sip:NONVIP;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr>.
>
> Record-Route: <sip:VIP;transport=tcp;r2=on;lr>.
>
> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP
> NONVIP;branch=z9hG4bK6f4.688efa90a17e02181ef7a11fecf8bb72.0;i=3.
>
> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP
> 1.1.1.1:4598;received=2.2.2.2;branch=z9hG4bKmqFaCxNo6m3f5LW4;rport=40020.
>
>  
>
> You can see the INVITE is sent from the VIP address (as specified
> using the tcp_source_ipv4 parameter). However, the added Via
> corresponds to the non-VIP address. Also, you can see the two record
> route headers added for both addresses.
>
>  
>
> Any idea?
>
>  
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mickael
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio World Conference, May 27-29, 2015
Berlin, Germany - http://www.kamailioworld.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20150505/04df2bb8/attachment.html>