[SR-Users] Kamailio Via: header issue

[Laura]

Hello,


honestly we only use the topoh modules for this

# topoh paramiters
modparam("topoh", "mask_ip", "1.1.1.1")

Pratically we created a cluster and we use VRRP for HA of the service..
so we use topoh for menage the virtual IP on kamailio..

Is there any other way we could use for stop using topoh ?

Regards


Il 24/05/16 13:11, Daniel-Constantin Mierla ha scritto:
>
> Hello,
>
> the long Via branch is because of using topoh module. Do you need that?
>
> The alternatives would be:
>
>  - disable topoh module
>
>  - or configure the kernel to do udp defragmentation (should be
> default in modern linux)
>
>  - or switch to tcp/tls
>
>  - or try to use the new topos module in 4.4 -- not that it is not
> well tested and you should not go with it in production directly. Any
> issue encountered with topos should be reported on kamailio project on
> github and I will take care fixing them.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>
> On 24/05/16 09:57, Laura wrote:
>> Good morning list,
>>
>> I need to ask you a question about a problem we are fighting on our VoIP
>> platform based on Kamailio 4.3.5.
>> Our platform is made by more nodes over Europe countries, and we are
>> encountering a problem with the size of the SIP package which, exceeds
>> the physiological limit of about 1350 bytes.
>> The real problem is caused from Via: Header (inside the SIP packet)
>> which is added to each element of the system for transit on the call.
>> >From what we have analyzed, the problem is not so much due to the number
>> of entered Via: records but, by the fact that they contain a branch
>> parameter extremely long.
>>
>> Here the call flow example from CARRIER A —> Kamailio1 —> Kamailio2 —>
>> CARRIER B
>>
>> Extract from SIP message sent from CARRIER A to K1
>>
>> INVITE sip:999912341234 at 192.168.158.42 SIP/2.0.
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.220.141:5060;branch=z9hG4bK49e4301c;rport.
>>
>> Extract from SIP message sent from K1 to K2
>>
>> INVITE sip:999912341234 at 192.168.127.244 SIP/2.0.
>> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.158.42;lr;did=194.a0f1;nat=yes>.
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 192.168.158.42;branch=z9hG4bK0635.7c1e97c2d5c01ea98e8d0e7fa23a3822.0.
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 192.168.158.42;branch=z9hG4bKsr-j4IPOlV7MGQKatycM.cuOBV4OBVLMGZfWxF-W.y6Mx1LgRWIC9gIgx4fzxj7MBP7MBVAOBF4M.1jmxuqC93X3heroEWvH9vsCFN43qd4zRj4Mlyf3l1LNSQLpx4uMx3A.
>>
>> Extract from SIP message sent from K2 to CARRIER B
>>
>> INVITE sip:999912341234 at 192.168.65.248 SIP/2.0.
>> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.127.244;lr;did=194.5122;nat=yes>.
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 192.168.127.244;branch=z9hG4bK0635.f843472880b380acde3a33732975fde9.0.
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 192.168.127.244;branch=z9hG4bKsr-j4IPOlV7MGQKatycW.F7MBj4OBFuzGZ4MB1LNSQLpx4uMx3AzuaVHRaYpB1JNEt736cQkBIvalaJmly6Mlj7W6Mfg.qw3leqWRMAMRKrz.rIzSPAg.pE3.Vl3.MZMBV7My**.
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 192.168.127.244;branch=z9hG4bKsr-j4IPOlV7MGQKatycW.F7MBj4OBFuzGZ4MB1JNEt736cQkBIvalaJmwWLORv4mK0Hot3w.jpam6t4kRWWOEWu.4eRWFQGKqfWauYEKwrSOKN7k.gWkxtMgue9mjMsg4IhkxaEkhrbW4uGjxpWPIg0.4eSWF47MRY1kUKfPlqlRxWvg9e5aKp6mxI6N4WS.BPlNRP4kIebWFudkR3loxtM.IWa.U0ZWUKWkxW0.
>>
>>
>> Is there anyone here with the idea how to solve this problem ?
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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://www.asipto.com - http://www.kamailio.org
> http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20160524/24d0c262/attachment.html>