Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22

[Elwin Formsma]

Hello,

Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
See attached screenshot.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |


[cid:D79E3447-3454-476A-A62A-***@woffice.colos.telecats.nl]

[Melcon Moraes]

Hmm, that's what I saw when trying to figure why Yealink sets do not work
well with BLF when user has callforward.

When registrar returns all contacts for the user, the SUBSCRIBE gets forked
to all of them, and which one replies firts "wins".

What were you doing to get this, Met?

-
MM

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl>wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
> See attached screenshot.
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
>
> Elwin Formsma
> Telecats BV
> -----
> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
> | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Melcon Moraes]

Ooops... I meant to say Elwin.

-
MM

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hmm, that's what I saw when trying to figure why Yealink sets do not work
> well with BLF when user has callforward.
>
> When registrar returns all contacts for the user, the SUBSCRIBE gets
> forked to all of them, and which one replies firts "wins".
>
> What were you doing to get this, Met?
>
> -
> MM
>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl>wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
>> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>> See attached screenshot.
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>
>>
>> Elwin Formsma
>> Telecats BV
>> -----
>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
>> 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>

[Elwin Formsma]

Hi,

This results in BLF's being broken in some cases.
Also, at one client of ours this seems to result in the sipXproxy running out of resources because they have loads of call forwardings.

In my opinion a SUBSCRIBE is only ment for the endpoint you are subscribing to and should not be forwarded, hence my question :)


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |

Op 31 okt. 2012, om 18:33 heeft Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>> het volgende geschreven:

Hmm, that's what I saw when trying to figure why Yealink sets do not work well with BLF when user has callforward.

When registrar returns all contacts for the user, the SUBSCRIBE gets forked to all of them, and which one replies firts "wins".

What were you doing to get this, Met?

-
MM

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl>> wrote:
Hello,

Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
See attached screenshot.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |


<Schermafbeelding 2012-10-31 om 15.44.07.png>

_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[George Niculae]

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This results in BLF's being broken in some cases.
> Also, at one client of ours this seems to result in the sipXproxy running
> out of resources because they have loads of call forwardings.
>
> In my opinion a SUBSCRIBE is only ment for the endpoint you are
> subscribing to and should not be forwarded, hence my question :)
>
>
Can you provide pcap and snapshot with proxy and registrar in debug?

Thanks,
George

[Elwin Formsma]

Hi George,

Sure.
Situation:
200 subscribes to 300
300 has a forward to 400
400 has a forward to 500

Pcap attached. Ive send you the snapshot in a separate mail.
My question: is the forwarding of subscribe's expected behaviour or could it perhapse be a bug.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |

[George Niculae]

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl> wrote:

> Hi George,
>
> Sure.
> Situation:
> 200 subscribes to 300
> 300 has a forward to 400
> 400 has a forward to 500
>
> Pcap attached. Ive send you the snapshot in a separate mail.
> My question: is the forwarding of subscribe's expected behaviour or could
> it perhapse be a bug.
>
>
Thanks Elwin, IMO it looks like a bug, let me review the logs and consult
with SIP guys in team and come back.

George

[Elwin Formsma]

Hi George,

Any news on this?


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |



Op 1 nov. 2012, om 13:12 heeft George Niculae <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> het volgende geschreven:

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl>> wrote:
Hi George,

Sure.
Situation:
200 subscribes to 300
300 has a forward to 400
400 has a forward to 500

Pcap attached. Ive send you the snapshot in a separate mail.
My question: is the forwarding of subscribe's expected behaviour or could it perhapse be a bug.


Thanks Elwin, IMO it looks like a bug, let me review the logs and consult with SIP guys in team and come back.

George

[George Niculae]

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl> wrote:

> Hi George,
>
> Any news on this?
>
>
Yes, discussed this with Joegen and is something we need to fix. Will do it
for 4.6 and then backporting to 4.4, I assume you seen this on old 4.4s as
well not only update22?

Thanks,
George

[Elwin Formsma]

Hi George,

Correct, stumbled uppon this issue on update #16. Decided to try #22 before posting to you guys.
Any clue on when this might be fixed?


Kind regards,

Elwin


Op 8 nov. 2012, om 11:20 heeft George Niculae <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> het volgende geschreven:

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl>> wrote:
Hi George,

Any news on this?


Yes, discussed this with Joegen and is something we need to fix. Will do it for 4.6 and then backporting to 4.4, I assume you seen this on old 4.4s as well not only update22?

Thanks,
George

[Joegen Baclor]

My plate is a bit full currently but it should not take until mid
November for a fix to be out.

On 11/08/2012 06:25 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
> Hi George,
>
> Correct, stumbled uppon this issue on update #16. Decided to try #22
> before posting to you guys.
> Any clue on when this might be fixed?
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Elwin
>
>
> Op 8 nov. 2012, om 11:20 heeft George Niculae <***@ezuce.com
> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl
>> <mailto:***@telecats.nl>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> Any news on this?
>>
>>
>> Yes, discussed this with Joegen and is something we need to fix. Will
>> do it for 4.6 and then backporting to 4.4, I assume you seen this on
>> old 4.4s as well not only update22?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> George
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Melcon Moraes]

Is there a JIRA for this?

-
MM


On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> My plate is a bit full currently but it should not take until mid
> November for a fix to be out.
>
>
> On 11/08/2012 06:25 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>
> Hi George,
>
> Correct, stumbled uppon this issue on update #16. Decided to try #22
> before posting to you guys.
> Any clue on when this might be fixed?
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Elwin
>
>
> Op 8 nov. 2012, om 11:20 heeft George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl>wrote:
>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> Any news on this?
>>
>>
> Yes, discussed this with Joegen and is something we need to fix. Will do
> it for 4.6 and then backporting to 4.4, I assume you seen this on old 4.4s
> as well not only update22?
>
> Thanks,
> George
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Melcon Moraes]

Couldn't find one.

Just created [XX-10522] <http://track.sipfoundry.org/browse/XX-10522>


-
MM

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is there a JIRA for this?
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
>> My plate is a bit full currently but it should not take until mid
>> November for a fix to be out.
>>
>>
>> On 11/08/2012 06:25 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> Correct, stumbled uppon this issue on update #16. Decided to try #22
>> before posting to you guys.
>> Any clue on when this might be fixed?
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Elwin
>>
>>
>> Op 8 nov. 2012, om 11:20 heeft George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> het
>> volgende geschreven:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi George,
>>>
>>> Any news on this?
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, discussed this with Joegen and is something we need to fix. Will
>> do it for 4.6 and then backporting to 4.4, I assume you seen this on old
>> 4.4s as well not only update22?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> George
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>

[George Niculae]

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> Couldn't find one.
>
> Just created [XX-10522] <http://track.sipfoundry.org/browse/XX-10522>
>
>
Thanks, there wasn't one created

George

[George Niculae]

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:52 PM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Couldn't find one.
>>
>> Just created [XX-10522] <http://track.sipfoundry.org/browse/XX-10522>
>>
>>
> Thanks, there wasn't one created
>
>
Guys, could you please check if this solves the issue? On
/etc/sipxpbx/forwardingrules.xml itsp accounts looks like

<route mappingType="itspname-callback">
<description>
Route url-dialed calls for itspname to the sipXbridge.
</description>
<routeFrom>test.org</routeFrom>
<routeTo authRequired='true'>192.168.0.11:5090</routeTo>
</route>

Modify each of them and enclose routeTo with methodMatch INVITE only,
something like:

<route mappingType="itspname-callback">
<description>
Route url-dialed calls for itspname to the sipXbridge.
</description>
<routeFrom>test.org</routeFrom>
<methodMatch>
<methodPattern>INVITE</methodPattern>
<routeTo authRequired='true'>192.168.0.11:5090</routeTo>
</methodMatch>
</route>

Don't send profiles, just restart sipxecs and retest.

Thanks,
George

[Melcon Moraes]

Hi George,

I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the
itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.

It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded to
itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of
userforward targets.

I'll try it and get back to you with the results.


thanks in advance

-
MM



On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:26 AM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:52 PM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Couldn't find one.
>>>
>>> Just created [XX-10522] <http://track.sipfoundry.org/browse/XX-10522>
>>>
>>>
>> Thanks, there wasn't one created
>>
>>
> Guys, could you please check if this solves the issue? On
> /etc/sipxpbx/forwardingrules.xml itsp accounts looks like
>
> <route mappingType="itspname-callback">
> <description>
> Route url-dialed calls for itspname to the sipXbridge.
> </description>
> <routeFrom>test.org</routeFrom>
> <routeTo authRequired='true'>192.168.0.11:5090</routeTo>
> </route>
>
> Modify each of them and enclose routeTo with methodMatch INVITE only,
> something like:
>
> <route mappingType="itspname-callback">
> <description>
> Route url-dialed calls for itspname to the sipXbridge.
> </description>
> <routeFrom>test.org</routeFrom>
> <methodMatch>
> <methodPattern>INVITE</methodPattern>
> <routeTo authRequired='true'>192.168.0.11:5090</routeTo>
> </methodMatch>
> </route>
>
> Don't send profiles, just restart sipxecs and retest.
>
> Thanks,
> George
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[George Niculae]

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi George,
>
> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the
> itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>

Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this out,
what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix


>
> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded
> to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of
> userforward targets.
>
> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>
>
Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)

Thanks
George

[Melcon Moraes]

Can I just restart proxy and registrar for the test? Would that be enough for the test?

I have some ongoing calls using sipXbridge and I wanted to avoid drop'em.

-
MM



--
Melcon Moraes
Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)


On Friday, November 9, 2012 at 10:52 AM, George Niculae wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com (mailto:***@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > Hi George,
> >
> > I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>
> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>
> >
> > It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of userforward targets.
> >
> > I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
> >
>
> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>
> Thanks
> George
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org (mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org)
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>

[Melcon Moraes]

I couldn't restart sipxecs yet. I've just tried with restarting only
sipxproxy and sipxregistrar and the SUBSCRIBE still gets forked to every
contact received by the 302 from registrar. However, SUBSCRIBE that hits
sipXbridge gets rejected with a 405 - Method not allowed, so I believe its
safe to say that the last change isn't really needed.

I'll still wait for no calls in my system so I can restart sipxecs entirely
and redo the tests.

-
MM




On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> Can I just restart proxy and registrar for the test? Would that be enough
> for the test?
>
> I have some ongoing calls using sipXbridge and I wanted to avoid drop'em.
>
> -
> MM
>
> --
> Melcon Moraes
> Sent with Sparrow <http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig>
>
> On Friday, November 9, 2012 at 10:52 AM, George Niculae wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi George,
>
> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the
> itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>
>
> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this out,
> what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>
>
>
> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded
> to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of
> userforward targets.
>
> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>
>
> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>
> Thanks
> George
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>

[Melcon Moraes]

UPDATE: I've just restarted sipXecs for the test and the changes suggested
in forwardingrules.xml does not have any effect. I had a PSTN number as one
of the userforward targets and the SUBSCRIBE got forwarded to sipXbridge
anyway.

As I stated on my previous message, sipXbridge response to the SUBSCRIBE
request is a 405 - Method not allowed

-
MM


On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> I couldn't restart sipxecs yet. I've just tried with restarting only
> sipxproxy and sipxregistrar and the SUBSCRIBE still gets forked to every
> contact received by the 302 from registrar. However, SUBSCRIBE that hits
> sipXbridge gets rejected with a 405 - Method not allowed, so I believe its
> safe to say that the last change isn't really needed.
>
> I'll still wait for no calls in my system so I can restart sipxecs
> entirely and redo the tests.
>
> -
> MM
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Can I just restart proxy and registrar for the test? Would that be enough
>> for the test?
>>
>> I have some ongoing calls using sipXbridge and I wanted to avoid drop'em.
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>> --
>> Melcon Moraes
>> Sent with Sparrow <http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig>
>>
>> On Friday, November 9, 2012 at 10:52 AM, George Niculae wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the
>> itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>>
>>
>> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this
>> out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>>
>>
>>
>> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded
>> to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of
>> userforward targets.
>>
>> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>>
>>
>> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>>
>> Thanks
>> George
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>

[Kyle Haefner]

Hi All,

Did the above fix work for you? I'm having a similar problem, but with
NOTIFY's. SIPX is forwarding these on and it might be what is contributing
to our gateways failing.

At any rate, SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY should not follow forwarding rules.

Kyle


On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:52 AM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the
>> itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>>
>
> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this
> out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>
>
>>
>> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be
>> forwarded to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded
>> to all of userforward targets.
>>
>> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>>
>>
> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>
> Thanks
> George
>



--
Kyle Haefner, M.S.
Communication Systems Programmer
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO
Phone: [phone]
Email: ***@colostate.edu

01010010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01101101 01100101 01101110
00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01100111 01110010 01100001 01101101
00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001
01110010 01111001 00101110

[Melcon Moraes]

No, it didn't work for me.

-
MM


On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Kyle Haefner <***@colostate.edu>wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Did the above fix work for you? I'm having a similar problem, but with
> NOTIFY's. SIPX is forwarding these on and it might be what is contributing
> to our gateways failing.
>
> At any rate, SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY should not follow forwarding rules.
>
> Kyle
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:52 AM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi George,
>>>
>>> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to
>>> the itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>>>
>>
>> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this
>> out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>>
>>
>>>
>>> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be
>>> forwarded to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded
>>> to all of userforward targets.
>>>
>>> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>>
>> Thanks
>> George
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Kyle Haefner, M.S.
> Communication Systems Programmer
> Colorado State University
> Fort Collins, CO
> Phone: [phone]
> Email: ***@colostate.edu
>
> 01010010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01101101 01100101 01101110
> 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01100111 01110010 01100001 01101101
> 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001
> 01110010 01111001 00101110
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Domenico Chierico]

This patch is a preliminary work on this problem, isn't extensively
tested but seem to work somehow.

I'm posting this just to have a feedback about it, because I'm not so
sure to have understood the issue.

thanks
Domenico Chierico

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, it didn't work for me.
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Kyle Haefner <***@colostate.edu>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Did the above fix work for you? I'm having a similar problem, but with
>> NOTIFY's. SIPX is forwarding these on and it might be what is contributing
>> to our gateways failing.
>>
>> At any rate, SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY should not follow forwarding rules.
>>
>> Kyle
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:52 AM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi George,
>>>>
>>>> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the
>>>> itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>>>
>>>
>>> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this
>>> out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded
>>>> to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of
>>>> userforward targets.
>>>>
>>>> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> George
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kyle Haefner, M.S.
>> Communication Systems Programmer
>> Colorado State University
>> Fort Collins, CO
>> Phone: [phone]
>> Email: ***@colostate.edu
>>
>> 01010010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01101101 01100101 01101110
>> 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01100111 01110010 01100001 01101101
>> 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001
>> 01110010 01111001 00101110
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Joegen Baclor]

Domenico,

Thanks for the patch. Yes this will work but it will break external
voicemails like exchange. I'm working on a patch that would tackle both
aliases and fallback rules and will be sending an rpm to test shortly.

Joegen


On 11/15/2012 12:21 AM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
> This patch is a preliminary work on this problem, isn't extensively
> tested but seem to work somehow.
>
> I'm posting this just to have a feedback about it, because I'm not so
> sure to have understood the issue.
>
> thanks
> Domenico Chierico
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No, it didn't work for me.
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Kyle Haefner <***@colostate.edu>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Did the above fix work for you? I'm having a similar problem, but with
>>> NOTIFY's. SIPX is forwarding these on and it might be what is contributing
>>> to our gateways failing.
>>>
>>> At any rate, SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY should not follow forwarding rules.
>>>
>>> Kyle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:52 AM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi George,
>>>>>
>>>>> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the
>>>>> itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>>>>
>>>> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this
>>>> out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded
>>>>> to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of
>>>>> userforward targets.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> George
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kyle Haefner, M.S.
>>> Communication Systems Programmer
>>> Colorado State University
>>> Fort Collins, CO
>>> Phone: [phone]
>>> Email: ***@colostate.edu
>>>
>>> 01010010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01101101 01100101 01101110
>>> 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01100111 01110010 01100001 01101101
>>> 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001
>>> 01110010 01111001 00101110
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Domenico Chierico]

which kind of approach are you following?
My basic idea was to use SUBSCRIBE plugin to filter out wrong contacts
and then start to improve the plugin implementation with a per
Request behaviour.

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
> Domenico,
>
> Thanks for the patch. Yes this will work but it will break external
> voicemails like exchange. I'm working on a patch that would tackle both
> aliases and fallback rules and will be sending an rpm to test shortly.
>
> Joegen
>
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 12:21 AM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>
> This patch is a preliminary work on this problem, isn't extensively
> tested but seem to work somehow.
>
> I'm posting this just to have a feedback about it, because I'm not so
> sure to have understood the issue.
>
> thanks
> Domenico Chierico
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> No, it didn't work for me.
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Kyle Haefner <***@colostate.edu>
> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Did the above fix work for you? I'm having a similar problem, but with
> NOTIFY's. SIPX is forwarding these on and it might be what is contributing
> to our gateways failing.
>
> At any rate, SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY should not follow forwarding rules.
>
> Kyle
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:52 AM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi George,
>
> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the
> itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>
> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this
> out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>
>
> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded
> to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of
> userforward targets.
>
> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>
> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>
> Thanks
> George
>
>
>
> --
> Kyle Haefner, M.S.
> Communication Systems Programmer
> Colorado State University
> Fort Collins, CO
> Phone: [phone]
> Email: ***@colostate.edu
>
> 01010010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01101101 01100101 01101110
> 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01100111 01110010 01100001 01101101
> 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001
> 01110010 01111001 00101110
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>

[Joegen Baclor]

Yes, I understand what you intended to do. Though the filter was
specific to "INT" callTag. In my opinion, contacts should have never
been inserted in the first place. The place I handled this is in
CallerAlias and in FallBack.

On 11/15/2012 05:17 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
> which kind of approach are you following?
> My basic idea was to use SUBSCRIBE plugin to filter out wrong contacts
> and then start to improve the plugin implementation with a per
> Request behaviour.
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>> Domenico,
>>
>> Thanks for the patch. Yes this will work but it will break external
>> voicemails like exchange. I'm working on a patch that would tackle both
>> aliases and fallback rules and will be sending an rpm to test shortly.
>>
>> Joegen
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2012 12:21 AM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>>
>> This patch is a preliminary work on this problem, isn't extensively
>> tested but seem to work somehow.
>>
>> I'm posting this just to have a feedback about it, because I'm not so
>> sure to have understood the issue.
>>
>> thanks
>> Domenico Chierico
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> No, it didn't work for me.
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Kyle Haefner <***@colostate.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Did the above fix work for you? I'm having a similar problem, but with
>> NOTIFY's. SIPX is forwarding these on and it might be what is contributing
>> to our gateways failing.
>>
>> At any rate, SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY should not follow forwarding rules.
>>
>> Kyle
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:52 AM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the
>> itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>>
>> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this
>> out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>>
>>
>> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded
>> to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of
>> userforward targets.
>>
>> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>>
>> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>>
>> Thanks
>> George
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kyle Haefner, M.S.
>> Communication Systems Programmer
>> Colorado State University
>> Fort Collins, CO
>> Phone: [phone]
>> Email: ***@colostate.edu
>>
>> 01010010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01101101 01100101 01101110
>> 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01100111 01110010 01100001 01101101
>> 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001
>> 01110010 01111001 00101110
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>

[Tony Graziano]

I also think subscribe should not be forwarded to gateways, I see this with
users who subscribe to presence in speed dial when the speeddial is a PSTN
number. I somehow think this is part of the same overall issue with
subscribe in this instance. I also think sipxconfig could remedy this by
qualifying the existence of the user on the system when presence is checked
though...

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Kyle Haefner
<***@colostate.edu>wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Did the above fix work for you? I'm having a similar problem, but with
> NOTIFY's. SIPX is forwarding these on and it might be what is contributing
> to our gateways failing.
>
> At any rate, SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY should not follow forwarding rules.
>
> Kyle
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:52 AM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi George,
>>>
>>> I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to
>>> the itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.
>>>
>>
>> Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this
>> out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix
>>
>>
>>>
>>> It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be
>>> forwarded to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded
>>> to all of userforward targets.
>>>
>>> I'll try it and get back to you with the results.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)
>>
>> Thanks
>> George
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Kyle Haefner, M.S.
> Communication Systems Programmer
> Colorado State University
> Fort Collins, CO
> Phone: [phone]
> Email: ***@colostate.edu
>
> 01010010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01101101 01100101 01101110
> 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01100111 01110010 01100001 01101101
> 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001
> 01110010 01111001 00101110
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>



--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tony Graziano, Manager
Telephone: [phone]
sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.net
Fax: [phone]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Linked-In Profile:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4
Ask about our Internet Fax services!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Using or developing for sipXecs from SIPFoundry? Ask me about sipX-CoLab
2013!
<http://sipxcolab2013.eventbrite.com/?discount=tony2013>

--
LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
Telephone: [phone]
sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.net

Helpdesk Customers: http://myhelp.myitdepartment.net
Blog: http://blog.myitdepartment.net

[Elwin Formsma]

Hi Tony,

My original issue/question wasnt just abound sending subscribe's to gateways. Subscribes are sent all over the place following all call forwardings. In my opinion they should only be sent to the number you are subscribing to.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |

Op 14 nov. 2012, om 18:45 heeft Tony Graziano <***@myitdepartment.net<mailto:***@myitdepartment.net>> het volgende geschreven:

I also think subscribe should not be forwarded to gateways, I see this with users who subscribe to presence in speed dial when the speeddial is a PSTN number. I somehow think this is part of the same overall issue with subscribe in this instance. I also think sipxconfig could remedy this by qualifying the existence of the user on the system when presence is checked though...

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Kyle Haefner <***@colostate.edu<mailto:***@colostate.edu>> wrote:
Hi All,

Did the above fix work for you? I'm having a similar problem, but with NOTIFY's. SIPX is forwarding these on and it might be what is contributing to our gateways failing.

At any rate, SUBSCRIBE and NOTIFY should not follow forwarding rules.

Kyle


On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:52 AM, George Niculae <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi George,

I might be terribly wrong here but how this issue can be related to the itsp? I believe the scenario Elwin described has no itsp at all.

Well not quite, I might be terribly wrong :) Thanks for pointing this out, what I suggested could be just a part of the big fix


It seems that this config change would allow only INVITE to be forwarded to itsp accounts, but wouldn't prevent SUBSCRIBE to be forwarded to all of userforward targets.

I'll try it and get back to you with the results.


Yes, please, if you have an itsp :)

Thanks
George



--
Kyle Haefner, M.S.
Communication Systems Programmer
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO
Phone: [phone]
Email: ***@colostate.edu<mailto:***@colostate.edu>

01010010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01101101 01100101 01101110 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01100111 01110010 01100001 01101101 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00101110

_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/



--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tony Graziano, Manager
Telephone: [phone]
sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.net<mailto:***@voice.myitdepartment.net>
Fax: [phone]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Linked-In Profile:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4
Ask about our Internet Fax services!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Using or developing for sipXecs from SIPFoundry? Ask me about sipX-CoLab 2013!
[http://www.ezuce.com/image/image_gallery?uuid=61c95dd3-a26d-4363-95b1-131231e1edf0&groupId=284283&t=1340112036507%22+style=%22width:+310px;+height:+310px;]<http://sipxcolab2013.eventbrite.com/?discount=tony2013>


LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
Telephone: [phone]
sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.net<mailto:***@voice.myitdepartment.net>

Helpdesk Customers: http://myhelp.myitdepartment.net<http://myhelp.myitdepartment.net/>
Blog: http://blog.myitdepartment.net<http://blog.myitdepartment.net/>

[Joegen Baclor]

Elwin,

Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.

Let me know.

Joegen

On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
> See attached screenshot.
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
>
> Elwin Formsma
> Telecats BV
> -----
> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
> 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl
> <mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Melcon Moraes]

Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?

-
MM


On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> Elwin,
>
> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>
> Let me know.
>
> Joegen
>
>
> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
> See attached screenshot.
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
>
> Elwin Formsma
> Telecats BV
> -----
> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
> | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Henry Dogger]

Hi Joegen,

We have tested this (quickly) and these tests look promising.
We still want to test this a bit further, but I do not see any subscribes getting forwarded so far.
We will report back if we have further tested this fix, good work!

Regards,
Henry (colleague of Elwin)
Telecats BV
________________________________________
From: sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] on behalf of Melcon Moraes [***@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 14:21
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22

Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?

-
MM


On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
Elwin,

Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.

Let me know.

Joegen


On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
Hello,

Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
See attached screenshot.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |


[cid:***@ezuce.com]


_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Henry Dogger]

Joegen,

I did notice a slower working BLF when using the RPM you sended, it seems sipXecs is delaying the subscribe/notify a bit.
Perhaps this is expected behavior, but just wanted to point it out :)

Regards,
Henry
________________________________________
From: sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] on behalf of Henry Dogger [***@telecats.nl]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 14:29
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22

Hi Joegen,

We have tested this (quickly) and these tests look promising.
We still want to test this a bit further, but I do not see any subscribes getting forwarded so far.
We will report back if we have further tested this fix, good work!

Regards,
Henry (colleague of Elwin)
Telecats BV
________________________________________
From: sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] on behalf of Melcon Moraes [***@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 14:21
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22

Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?

-
MM


On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
Elwin,

Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.

Let me know.

Joegen


On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
Hello,

Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
See attached screenshot.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |


[cid:***@ezuce.com]


_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Joegen Baclor]

Definitely not expected behavior. It does a very basic check in two
plugins. alias and fallback. In alais, susbcribe opts out if alias
relation is userforward. In fallback, it totally opts out for all
subscribes. RLS routing happens in mapping rules which is never touched.

On 11/15/2012 10:35 PM, Henry Dogger wrote:
> Joegen,
>
> I did notice a slower working BLF when using the RPM you sended, it seems sipXecs is delaying the subscribe/notify a bit.
> Perhaps this is expected behavior, but just wanted to point it out :)
>
> Regards,
> Henry
> ________________________________________
> From: sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] on behalf of Henry Dogger [***@telecats.nl]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 14:29
> To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22
>
> Hi Joegen,
>
> We have tested this (quickly) and these tests look promising.
> We still want to test this a bit further, but I do not see any subscribes getting forwarded so far.
> We will report back if we have further tested this fix, good work!
>
> Regards,
> Henry (colleague of Elwin)
> Telecats BV
> ________________________________________
> From: sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] on behalf of Melcon Moraes [***@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 14:21
> To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22
>
> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
> Elwin,
>
> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>
> Let me know.
>
> Joegen
>
>
> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
> See attached screenshot.
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
>
> Elwin Formsma
> Telecats BV
> -----
> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>
>
> [cid:***@ezuce.com]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Henry Dogger]

Hmm, I see.
We will take a closer look on this then, as said only did some quick tests.
Will report back when we did a few more tests.
________________________________________
From: Joegen Baclor [***@ezuce.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 15:46
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Cc: Henry Dogger
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22

Definitely not expected behavior. It does a very basic check in two
plugins. alias and fallback. In alais, susbcribe opts out if alias
relation is userforward. In fallback, it totally opts out for all
subscribes. RLS routing happens in mapping rules which is never touched.

On 11/15/2012 10:35 PM, Henry Dogger wrote:
> Joegen,
>
> I did notice a slower working BLF when using the RPM you sended, it seems sipXecs is delaying the subscribe/notify a bit.
> Perhaps this is expected behavior, but just wanted to point it out :)
>
> Regards,
> Henry
> ________________________________________
> From: sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] on behalf of Henry Dogger [***@telecats.nl]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 14:29
> To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22
>
> Hi Joegen,
>
> We have tested this (quickly) and these tests look promising.
> We still want to test this a bit further, but I do not see any subscribes getting forwarded so far.
> We will report back if we have further tested this fix, good work!
>
> Regards,
> Henry (colleague of Elwin)
> Telecats BV
> ________________________________________
> From: sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] on behalf of Melcon Moraes [***@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 14:21
> To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22
>
> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
> Elwin,
>
> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>
> Let me know.
>
> Joegen
>
>
> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
> See attached screenshot.
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
>
> Elwin Formsma
> Telecats BV
> -----
> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>
>
> [cid:***@ezuce.com]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Joegen Baclor]

Hi Melcon,

Unfortunately I only ahve 64 bit rpms for now. I'll get back to you
when I get the 32 bit RPM handy.

On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> Elwin,
>
> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>
> Let me know.
>
> Joegen
>
>
> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a
>> SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>> See attached screenshot.
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>
>>
>> Elwin Formsma
>> Telecats BV
>> -----
>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: 053
>> 488 99 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl
>> <mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Joegen Baclor]

Here you go. Let me know how it goes.

On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> Elwin,
>
> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>
> Let me know.
>
> Joegen
>
>
> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a
>> SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>> See attached screenshot.
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>
>>
>> Elwin Formsma
>> Telecats BV
>> -----
>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: 053
>> 488 99 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl
>> <mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Domenico Chierico]

what about the patch file?

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>
> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
>> Elwin,
>>
>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>
>> Let me know.
>>
>> Joegen
>>
>>
>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
>> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>> See attached screenshot.
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>
>>
>> Elwin Formsma
>> Telecats BV
>> -----
>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
>> 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Joegen Baclor]

Here's the patch.


On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
> what about the patch file?
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
>> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Elwin,
>>
>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>
>> Let me know.
>>
>> Joegen
>>
>>
>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a
>>> SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>
>>>
>>> Elwin Formsma
>>> Telecats BV
>>> -----
>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106
>>> <tel:[phone]> | Tel: [phone]
>>> <tel:053%20488%2099%2044> | Fax: [phone]
>>> <tel:053%C2%A0488%2099%2010> | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl
>>> <mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Joegen Baclor]

Holy crap, looking at the patch there is a missing return statement in
the fallback rules so this patch will only work for userforwards. I'll
ammend and resend rpms.

On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
> what about the patch file?
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
>> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Elwin,
>>
>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>
>> Let me know.
>>
>> Joegen
>>
>>
>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a
>>> SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>
>>>
>>> Elwin Formsma
>>> Telecats BV
>>> -----
>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106
>>> <tel:[phone]> | Tel: [phone]
>>> <tel:053%20488%2099%2044> | Fax: [phone]
>>> <tel:053%C2%A0488%2099%2010> | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl
>>> <mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Domenico Chierico]

heheh :)

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> Holy crap, looking at the patch there is a missing return statement in
> the fallback rules so this patch will only work for userforwards. I'll
> ammend and resend rpms.
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>
> what about the patch file?
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
>> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>
>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Elwin,
>>>
>>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>>
>>> Let me know.
>>>
>>> Joegen
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
>>> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>
>>>
>>> Elwin Formsma
>>> Telecats BV
>>> -----
>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
>>> 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>

[Joegen Baclor]

Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle susbcribe not
getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules becuase of a missing
return statement. If you are testing dial-plans like testing if it gets
forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.

On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
> what about the patch file?
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
>> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Elwin,
>>
>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>
>> Let me know.
>>
>> Joegen
>>
>>
>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a
>>> SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>
>>>
>>> Elwin Formsma
>>> Telecats BV
>>> -----
>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106
>>> <tel:[phone]> | Tel: [phone]
>>> <tel:053%20488%2099%2044> | Fax: [phone]
>>> <tel:053%C2%A0488%2099%2010> | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl
>>> <mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Melcon Moraes]

Thank you, Joegen.

I'll test it and let you know the results.

-
MM


On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle susbcribe not
> getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules becuase of a missing
> return statement. If you are testing dial-plans like testing if it gets
> forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>
> what about the patch file?
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
>> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>
>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Elwin,
>>>
>>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>>
>>> Let me know.
>>>
>>> Joegen
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
>>> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>
>>>
>>> Elwin Formsma
>>> Telecats BV
>>> -----
>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
>>> 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Melcon Moraes]

Hi, Joegen.

It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and didn't notice any
side-effects, like the slower BLF metioned by Henry.

Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302, so the SUBSCRIBE
to the FS gets replied with a "405 - Method not allowed".

Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?

Henry, can you provide some more details about your first test you've
noticed a little delay? How many phone sets were on the system; how many
BLF subscribes? Even with the newest RPM, have you noticed the same delay?


Best regards.

-
MM


On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you, Joegen.
>
> I'll test it and let you know the results.
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
>> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle susbcribe not
>> getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules becuase of a missing
>> return statement. If you are testing dial-plans like testing if it gets
>> forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>>
>> what about the patch file?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>>
>>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>>
>>> -
>>> MM
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Elwin,
>>>>
>>>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>>>
>>>> Let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Joegen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
>>>> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Elwin Formsma
>>>> Telecats BV
>>>> -----
>>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: 053 488
>>>> 99 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>

[Joegen Baclor]

Melcon,

If you can test SAA and BLF, so much the better. Regarding subscribes
getting forwarded to FS, that is something that can be augmented by the
mapping rules methodMatch. For now, I think that is benign and won't
cause any noticeable effect in traffic.

Joegen

On 11/17/2012 07:19 AM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
> Hi, Joegen.
>
> It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and didn't notice
> any side-effects, like the slower BLF metioned by Henry.
>
> Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302, so the
> SUBSCRIBE to the FS gets replied with a "405 - Method not allowed".
>
> Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?
>
> Henry, can you provide some more details about your first test you've
> noticed a little delay? How many phone sets were on the system; how
> many BLF subscribes? Even with the newest RPM, have you noticed the
> same delay?
>
>
> Best regards.
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com
> <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Joegen.
>
> I'll test it and let you know the results.
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle
> susbcribe not getting forwarded but will still hit fallback
> rules becuase of a missing return statement. If you are
> testing dial-plans like testing if it gets forwarded to
> sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>> what about the patch file?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor
>> <***@ezuce.com <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for
>>> testing?
>>>
>>> -
>>> MM
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor
>>> <***@ezuce.com <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Elwin,
>>>
>>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>>
>>> Let me know.
>>>
>>> Joegen
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason
>>>> why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Elwin Formsma
>>>> Telecats BV
>>>> -----
>>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106
>>>> <tel:[phone]> | Tel: [phone]
>>>> <tel:053%20488%2099%2044> | Fax: [phone]
>>>> <tel:053%C2%A0488%2099%2010> | E-mail:
>>>> ***@telecats.nl <mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>>>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>>> List Archive:
>>> http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Melcon Moraes]

Hello, Joegen.

On the BLF topic, I have a BLF assigned to a Hunt Group and when some
member of the group is on call/receiving, the BLF shows that perfectly.
Also, I was able to use the Direct Pickup(*78+extension) to pickup a
ringing call form any member of the HG.

After the "upgrade"( from sipxregistry-4.4.0-459.gf9c26
to sipxregistry-4.4.0-464.g3d5d0), the SUBSCRIBE does not get forwarded to
userforward anymore, as expected. As a side-effect, no more BLF and Direct
Pickup for HG, since HGs have a "userforward" relation to it's members.

Do you see any way around this?

-
MM


On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> Melcon,
>
> If you can test SAA and BLF, so much the better. Regarding subscribes
> getting forwarded to FS, that is something that can be augmented by the
> mapping rules methodMatch. For now, I think that is benign and won't cause
> any noticeable effect in traffic.
>
> Joegen
>
>
> On 11/17/2012 07:19 AM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>
> Hi, Joegen.
>
> It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and didn't notice any
> side-effects, like the slower BLF metioned by Henry.
>
> Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302, so the
> SUBSCRIBE to the FS gets replied with a "405 - Method not allowed".
>
> Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?
>
> Henry, can you provide some more details about your first test you've
> noticed a little delay? How many phone sets were on the system; how many
> BLF subscribes? Even with the newest RPM, have you noticed the same delay?
>
>
> Best regards.
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thank you, Joegen.
>>
>> I'll test it and let you know the results.
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle susbcribe
>>> not getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules becuase of a
>>> missing return statement. If you are testing dial-plans like testing if it
>>> gets forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>>>
>>> what about the patch file?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> MM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Elwin,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me know.
>>>>>
>>>>> Joegen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
>>>>> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Elwin Formsma
>>>>> Telecats BV
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: 053 488
>>>>> 99 44 <053%20488%2099%2044> | Fax: [phone]<053%C2%A0488%2099%2010>| E-mail:
>>>>> ***@telecats.nl |
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>

[Henry Dogger]

Hi Melcon,

Tested with two phones subscribing to each other. They were tiptels (yealink) phones, have not tested with the newest RPM.
Next week we will test this RPM in one of our bigger test cases, then I will report back about the findings we have.

Regards,
Henry

From: sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto:sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of Melcon Moraes
Sent: zaterdag 17 november 2012 0:20
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22

Hi, Joegen.

It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and didn't notice any side-effects, like the slower BLF metioned by Henry.

Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302, so the SUBSCRIBE to the FS gets replied with a "405 - Method not allowed".

Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?

Henry, can you provide some more details about your first test you've noticed a little delay? How many phone sets were on the system; how many BLF subscribes? Even with the newest RPM, have you noticed the same delay?


Best regards.

-
MM

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
Thank you, Joegen.

I'll test it and let you know the results.

-
MM

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle susbcribe not getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules becuase of a missing return statement. If you are testing dial-plans like testing if it gets forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.


On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
what about the patch file?
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
Here you go. Let me know how it goes.


On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?

-
MM

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com<mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
Elwin,

Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.

Let me know.

Joegen


On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
Hello,

Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
See attached screenshot.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106<tel:[phone]> | Tel: [phone]<tel:053%20488%2099%2044> | Fax: [phone]<tel:053%C2%A0488%2099%2010> | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |


[cid:***@01CDC4AB.45DDD4F0]

_______________________________________________

sipx-users mailing list

sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>

List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/


_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/



_______________________________________________

sipx-users mailing list

sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>

List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/


_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/



_______________________________________________

sipx-users mailing list

sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>

List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/


_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Melcon Moraes]

Hi, Henry.

I'm curious, have you tested the RPM? How was that? Any findings/side
effects?

-
MM


On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Henry Dogger <***@telecats.nl> wrote:

> Hi Melcon,****
>
> ** **
>
> Tested with two phones subscribing to each other. They were tiptels
> (yealink) phones, have not tested with the newest RPM.****
>
> Next week we will test this RPM in one of our bigger test cases, then I
> will report back about the findings we have.****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards,****
>
> Henry****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto:
> sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] *On Behalf Of *Melcon Moraes
> *Sent:* zaterdag 17 november 2012 0:20
>
> *To:* Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
> *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22****
>
> ** **
>
> Hi, Joegen.****
>
> ** **
>
> It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and didn't notice any
> side-effects, like the slower BLF metioned by Henry.****
>
> ** **
>
> Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302, so the SUBSCRIBE
> to the FS gets replied with a "405 - Method not allowed".****
>
> ** **
>
> Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?****
>
> ** **
>
> Henry, can you provide some more details about your first test you've
> noticed a little delay? How many phone sets were on the system; how many
> BLF subscribes? Even with the newest RPM, have you noticed the same delay?
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Best regards.****
>
> ** **
>
> -****
>
> MM****
>
> ** **
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:**
> **
>
> Thank you, Joegen.****
>
> ** **
>
> I'll test it and let you know the results.****
>
> ** **
>
> -****
>
> MM****
>
> ** **
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:*
> ***
>
> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle susbcribe not
> getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules becuase of a missing
> return statement. If you are testing dial-plans like testing if it gets
> forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.****
>
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:****
>
> what about the patch file?****
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:*
> ***
>
> Here you go. Let me know how it goes. ****
>
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:****
>
> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing? ****
>
> ** **
>
> -
> MM****
>
> ** **
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:*
> ***
>
> Elwin,
>
> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>
> Let me know.
>
> Joegen ****
>
>
>
> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:****
>
> Hello, ****
>
> ** **
>
> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE would
> follow SipXecs call forwardings?****
>
> See attached screenshot.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Kind regards,****
>
> Met vriendelijke groet,****
>
>
>
> Elwin Formsma
> Telecats BV
> -----
> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]| Fax: 053 488
> 99 10 | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ****
>
> _______________________________________________****
>
> sipx-users mailing list****
>
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org****
>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/****
>
> ** **
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________****
>
> sipx-users mailing list****
>
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org****
>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/****
>
> ** **
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> _______________________________________________****
>
> sipx-users mailing list****
>
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org****
>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/****
>
> ** **
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Joegen Baclor]

We had to revert the patch in both 4.4 and 4.6. Subscribe forwarding is
used in some of the functionalities. Call-pickup and Park are
examples. These are broken by the patch for it requires user-forward
for SUSBCRIBEs. We need more fine grained version of this patch. It
would perhaps come as an update to 4.6 but surely not a patch for 4.4.

On 12/04/2012 02:23 AM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
> Hi, Henry.
>
> I'm curious, have you tested the RPM? How was that? Any findings/side
> effects?
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Henry Dogger <***@telecats.nl
> <mailto:***@telecats.nl>> wrote:
>
> Hi Melcon,
>
> Tested with two phones subscribing to each other. They were
> tiptels (yealink) phones, have not tested with the newest RPM.
>
> Next week we will test this RPM in one of our bigger test cases,
> then I will report back about the findings we have.
>
> Regards,
>
> Henry
>
> *From:*sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> <mailto:sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> [mailto:sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> <mailto:sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org>] *On Behalf Of
> *Melcon Moraes
> *Sent:* zaterdag 17 november 2012 0:20
>
>
> *To:* Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
> *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22
>
> Hi, Joegen.
>
> It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and didn't
> notice any side-effects, like the slower BLF metioned by Henry.
>
> Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302, so the
> SUBSCRIBE to the FS gets replied with a "405 - Method not allowed".
>
> Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?
>
> Henry, can you provide some more details about your first test
> you've noticed a little delay? How many phone sets were on the
> system; how many BLF subscribes? Even with the newest RPM, have
> you noticed the same delay?
>
> Best regards.
>
> -
>
> MM
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com
> <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Joegen.
>
> I'll test it and let you know the results.
>
> -
>
> MM
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle
> susbcribe not getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules
> becuase of a missing return statement. If you are testing
> dial-plans like testing if it gets forwarded to sipXbridge, then
> you need to update the rpms.
>
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>
> what about the patch file?
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor
> <***@ezuce.com <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>
>
>
> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>
> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>
> -
> MM
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor
> <***@ezuce.com <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> Elwin,
>
> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>
> Let me know.
>
> Joegen
>
>
>
> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason
> why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>
> See attached screenshot.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
>
>
> Elwin Formsma
> Telecats BV
> -----
> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106
> <tel:[phone]> | Tel: [phone]
> <tel:053%20488%2099%2044> | Fax: [phone]
> <tel:053%C2%A0488%2099%2010> | E-mail:
> ***@telecats.nl <mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> sipx-users mailing list
>
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>
> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> sipx-users mailing list
>
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>
> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> sipx-users mailing list
>
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>
> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Niek Vlessert]

That's too bad. :( The issue generates a lot of traffic on systems, which
causes serious issues, like crashing the proxy. I guess the correct patch
on 4.6 is not an option but a requirement. And then backporting won't be
that hard because the code of this part of SipXecs didn't change a lot
going from 4.4 to 4.6? :)

I didn't look into the code a lot but i guess it's possible to distinguish
SIP subscribe BLF messages and other SIP subscribe messages?

Regards,

Niek


On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> We had to revert the patch in both 4.4 and 4.6. Subscribe forwarding is
> used in some of the functionalities. Call-pickup and Park are examples.
> These are broken by the patch for it requires user-forward for SUSBCRIBEs.
> We need more fine grained version of this patch. It would perhaps come as
> an update to 4.6 but surely not a patch for 4.4.
>
> On 12/04/2012 02:23 AM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>
> Hi, Henry.
>
> I'm curious, have you tested the RPM? How was that? Any findings/side
> effects?
>
> -
> MM
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Henry Dogger <***@telecats.nl>wrote:
>
>> Hi Melcon,
>>
>>
>>
>> Tested with two phones subscribing to each other. They were tiptels
>> (yealink) phones, have not tested with the newest RPM.
>>
>> Next week we will test this RPM in one of our bigger test cases, then I
>> will report back about the findings we have.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Henry
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto:
>> sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] *On Behalf Of *Melcon Moraes
>> *Sent:* zaterdag 17 november 2012 0:20
>>
>> *To:* Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
>> *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi, Joegen.
>>
>>
>>
>> It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and didn't notice any
>> side-effects, like the slower BLF metioned by Henry.
>>
>>
>>
>> Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302, so the
>> SUBSCRIBE to the FS gets replied with a "405 - Method not allowed".
>>
>>
>>
>> Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?
>>
>>
>>
>> Henry, can you provide some more details about your first test you've
>> noticed a little delay? How many phone sets were on the system; how many
>> BLF subscribes? Even with the newest RPM, have you noticed the same delay?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>> MM
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you, Joegen.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'll test it and let you know the results.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>> MM
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>
>> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle susbcribe not
>> getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules becuase of a missing
>> return statement. If you are testing dial-plans like testing if it gets
>> forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>>
>> what about the patch file?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>
>> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>
>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>
>> Elwin,
>>
>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>
>> Let me know.
>>
>> Joegen
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE would
>> follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>
>> See attached screenshot.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>
>>
>>
>> Elwin Formsma
>> Telecats BV
>> -----
>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
>> 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> sipx-users mailing list
>>
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> sipx-users mailing list
>>
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> sipx-users mailing list
>>
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Niek Vlessert]

Hello Joegen,

Any news on this issue? Can you give us some hints on how to find out about
the type of the SUBSCRIBE message coming in? What is the correct way to
access the data in the package?

Regards,

Niek


On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Niek Vlessert <***@gmail.com>wrote:

> That's too bad. :( The issue generates a lot of traffic on systems, which
> causes serious issues, like crashing the proxy. I guess the correct patch
> on 4.6 is not an option but a requirement. And then backporting won't be
> that hard because the code of this part of SipXecs didn't change a lot
> going from 4.4 to 4.6? :)
>
> I didn't look into the code a lot but i guess it's possible
> to distinguish SIP subscribe BLF messages and other SIP subscribe messages?
>
> Regards,
>
> Niek
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>
>> We had to revert the patch in both 4.4 and 4.6. Subscribe forwarding
>> is used in some of the functionalities. Call-pickup and Park are
>> examples. These are broken by the patch for it requires user-forward for
>> SUSBCRIBEs. We need more fine grained version of this patch. It would
>> perhaps come as an update to 4.6 but surely not a patch for 4.4.
>>
>> On 12/04/2012 02:23 AM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>
>> Hi, Henry.
>>
>> I'm curious, have you tested the RPM? How was that? Any findings/side
>> effects?
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Henry Dogger <***@telecats.nl>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Melcon,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tested with two phones subscribing to each other. They were tiptels
>>> (yealink) phones, have not tested with the newest RPM.
>>>
>>> Next week we will test this RPM in one of our bigger test cases, then I
>>> will report back about the findings we have.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Henry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto:
>>> sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] *On Behalf Of *Melcon Moraes
>>> *Sent:* zaterdag 17 november 2012 0:20
>>>
>>> *To:* Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
>>> *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi, Joegen.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and didn't notice any
>>> side-effects, like the slower BLF metioned by Henry.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302, so the
>>> SUBSCRIBE to the FS gets replied with a "405 - Method not allowed".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Henry, can you provide some more details about your first test you've
>>> noticed a little delay? How many phone sets were on the system; how many
>>> BLF subscribes? Even with the newest RPM, have you noticed the same delay?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>>
>>> MM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you, Joegen.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'll test it and let you know the results.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>>
>>> MM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle susbcribe not
>>> getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules becuase of a missing
>>> return statement. If you are testing dial-plans like testing if it gets
>>> forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>>>
>>> what about the patch file?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>>
>>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> MM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Elwin,
>>>
>>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>>
>>> Let me know.
>>>
>>> Joegen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
>>> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>>
>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Elwin Formsma
>>> Telecats BV
>>> -----
>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
>>> 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>

[Joegen Baclor]

None yet but I just opened a tracker so when we get to regular sprint I
should be able to estimate a time of delivery.


On 12/12/2012 05:40 AM, Niek Vlessert wrote:
> Hello Joegen,
>
> Any news on this issue? Can you give us some hints on how to find out
> about the type of the SUBSCRIBE message coming in? What is the correct
> way to access the data in the package?
>
> Regards,
>
> Niek
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Niek Vlessert <***@gmail.com
> <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> That's too bad. :( The issue generates a lot of traffic on
> systems, which causes serious issues, like crashing the proxy. I
> guess the correct patch on 4.6 is not an option but a requirement.
> And then backporting won't be that hard because the code of this
> part of SipXecs didn't change a lot going from 4.4 to 4.6? :)
>
> I didn't look into the code a lot but i guess it's possible
> to distinguish SIP subscribe BLF messages and other SIP subscribe
> messages?
>
> Regards,
>
> Niek
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com
> <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>
> We had to revert the patch in both 4.4 and 4.6. Subscribe
> forwarding is used in some of the functionalities.
> Call-pickup and Park are examples. These are broken by the
> patch for it requires user-forward for SUSBCRIBEs. We need
> more fine grained version of this patch. It would perhaps
> come as an update to 4.6 but surely not a patch for 4.4.
>
> On 12/04/2012 02:23 AM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>> Hi, Henry.
>>
>> I'm curious, have you tested the RPM? How was that? Any
>> findings/side effects?
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Henry Dogger
>> <***@telecats.nl <mailto:***@telecats.nl>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Melcon,
>>
>> Tested with two phones subscribing to each other. They
>> were tiptels (yealink) phones, have not tested with the
>> newest RPM.
>>
>> Next week we will test this RPM in one of our bigger test
>> cases, then I will report back about the findings we have.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Henry
>>
>> *From:*sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> [mailto:sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org>] *On
>> Behalf Of *Melcon Moraes
>> *Sent:* zaterdag 17 november 2012 0:20
>>
>>
>> *To:* Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
>> *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding
>> 4.4.0-update #22
>>
>> Hi, Joegen.
>>
>> It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and
>> didn't notice any side-effects, like the slower BLF
>> metioned by Henry.
>>
>> Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302,
>> so the SUBSCRIBE to the FS gets replied with a "405 -
>> Method not allowed".
>>
>> Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?
>>
>> Henry, can you provide some more details about your first
>> test you've noticed a little delay? How many phone sets
>> were on the system; how many BLF subscribes? Even with
>> the newest RPM, have you noticed the same delay?
>>
>> Best regards.
>>
>> -
>>
>> MM
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes
>> <***@gmail.com <mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you, Joegen.
>>
>> I'll test it and let you know the results.
>>
>> -
>>
>> MM
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor
>> <***@ezuce.com <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle
>> susbcribe not getting forwarded but will still hit
>> fallback rules becuase of a missing return statement. If
>> you are testing dial-plans like testing if it gets
>> forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>>
>> what about the patch file?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor
>> <***@ezuce.com <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>
>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM
>> for testing?
>>
>> -
>> MM
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor
>> <***@ezuce.com <mailto:***@ezuce.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Elwin,
>>
>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>
>> Let me know.
>>
>> Joegen
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific
>> reason why a SUBSCRIBE would follow SipXecs
>> call forwardings?
>>
>> See attached screenshot.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>
>>
>>
>> Elwin Formsma
>> Telecats BV
>> -----
>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede
>> 06069106 <tel:[phone]> | Tel: [phone]
>> <tel:053%20488%2099%2044> | Fax: [phone]
>> 10 <tel:053%C2%A0488%2099%2010> | E-mail:
>> ***@telecats.nl
>> <mailto:***@telecats.nl> |
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> sipx-users mailing list
>>
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive:
>> http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> sipx-users mailing list
>>
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive:
>> http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> sipx-users mailing list
>>
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
>> List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> <mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

[Melcon Moraes]

Wouldn't that be [XX-10522] <http://track.sipfoundry.org/browse/XX-10522>?


-
MM


On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:

> None yet but I just opened a tracker so when we get to regular sprint I
> should be able to estimate a time of delivery.
>
>
>
> On 12/12/2012 05:40 AM, Niek Vlessert wrote:
>
> Hello Joegen,
>
> Any news on this issue? Can you give us some hints on how to find out
> about the type of the SUBSCRIBE message coming in? What is the correct way
> to access the data in the package?
>
> Regards,
>
> Niek
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Niek Vlessert <***@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> That's too bad. :( The issue generates a lot of traffic on systems, which
>> causes serious issues, like crashing the proxy. I guess the correct patch
>> on 4.6 is not an option but a requirement. And then backporting won't be
>> that hard because the code of this part of SipXecs didn't change a lot
>> going from 4.4 to 4.6? :)
>>
>> I didn't look into the code a lot but i guess it's possible
>> to distinguish SIP subscribe BLF messages and other SIP subscribe messages?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Niek
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We had to revert the patch in both 4.4 and 4.6. Subscribe forwarding
>>> is used in some of the functionalities. Call-pickup and Park are
>>> examples. These are broken by the patch for it requires user-forward for
>>> SUSBCRIBEs. We need more fine grained version of this patch. It would
>>> perhaps come as an update to 4.6 but surely not a patch for 4.4.
>>>
>>> On 12/04/2012 02:23 AM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi, Henry.
>>>
>>> I'm curious, have you tested the RPM? How was that? Any findings/side
>>> effects?
>>>
>>> -
>>> MM
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Henry Dogger <***@telecats.nl>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Melcon,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tested with two phones subscribing to each other. They were tiptels
>>>> (yealink) phones, have not tested with the newest RPM.
>>>>
>>>> Next week we will test this RPM in one of our bigger test cases, then I
>>>> will report back about the findings we have.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Henry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto:
>>>> sipx-users-***@list.sipfoundry.org] *On Behalf Of *Melcon Moraes
>>>> *Sent:* zaterdag 17 november 2012 0:20
>>>>
>>>> *To:* Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Subscribe forwarding 4.4.0-update #22
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi, Joegen.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems to be ok now. I've been using it all day and didn't notice any
>>>> side-effects, like the slower BLF metioned by Henry.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Registrar now only returns the AOR and the VM in the 302, so the
>>>> SUBSCRIBE to the FS gets replied with a "405 - Method not allowed".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is there any specific test you would want me to perform?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Henry, can you provide some more details about your first test you've
>>>> noticed a little delay? How many phone sets were on the system; how many
>>>> BLF subscribes? Even with the newest RPM, have you noticed the same delay?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>>
>>>> MM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Melcon Moraes <***@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thank you, Joegen.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll test it and let you know the results.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>>
>>>> MM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Updated patch and RPMs. The preious RPM will only tackle susbcribe not
>>>> getting forwarded but will still hit fallback rules becuase of a missing
>>>> return statement. If you are testing dial-plans like testing if it gets
>>>> forwarded to sipXbridge, then you need to update the rpms.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/15/2012 11:58 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>>>>
>>>> what about the patch file?
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Here you go. Let me know how it goes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/15/2012 09:21 PM, Melcon Moraes wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Joegen, can you please also provide a 32bits RPM for testing?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> MM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Joegen Baclor <***@ezuce.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Elwin,
>>>>
>>>> Please test the same scenario using the attached RPM.
>>>>
>>>> Let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Joegen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/31/2012 10:46 PM, Elwin Formsma wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just a quick question. Is there any specific reason why a SUBSCRIBE
>>>> would follow SipXecs call forwardings?
>>>>
>>>> See attached screenshot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Elwin Formsma
>>>> Telecats BV
>>>> -----
>>>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: 053 488
>>>> 99 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>>
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>>
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>>
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>>
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>>
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>>
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing listsipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>

[Elwin Formsma]

Hi Joegen,

We have created an update for this patch to make BLF and Pick-up on Huntgroups possible. Please review attached patchfile and let us know what you think.
This has been tested by us with succes. We might have overlooked some stuff though, so feedback is welcome.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |

[Tony Graziano]

I'm a little lost. I thought this was going to be reverted altogether. I
find call park (cannot pickup) is broken in the last stage update.

So is it being worked on? Or reverted. I'd suggest to have it reverted
until a patch is tested and known to work... anyone using stage to test
against is stuck with a broken call pickup until then.

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl>wrote:

> Hi Joegen,
>
> We have created an update for this patch to make BLF and Pick-up on
> Huntgroups possible. Please review attached patchfile and let us know what
> you think.
> This has been tested by us with succes. We might have overlooked some
> stuff though, so feedback is welcome.
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
>
> Elwin Formsma
> Telecats BV
> -----
> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
> | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>



--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tony Graziano, Manager
Telephone: [phone]
sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.net
Fax: [phone]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Linked-In Profile:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4
Ask about our Internet Fax services!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Using or developing for sipXecs from SIPFoundry? Ask me about sipX-CoLab
2013!
<http://sipxcolab2013.eventbrite.com/?discount=tony2013>

--
LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
Telephone: [phone]
sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.net

Helpdesk Customers: http://myhelp.myitdepartment.net
Blog: http://blog.myitdepartment.net

[Elwin Formsma]

Tony,

It was indeed reverted by Joegen (Ezuce).
However the Subscribe following user forwarding is a big issue for us. Thats why we decided not to wait for a final fix in 4.6 since we are still on 4.4.
We fixed the problems with huntgroups ourselfs, and hope this fix is usuable for Ezuce as well. Thats why im posting this patch to the user list.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |

Op 14 dec. 2012, om 15:33 heeft Tony Graziano <***@myitdepartment.net<mailto:***@myitdepartment.net>> het volgende geschreven:

I'm a little lost. I thought this was going to be reverted altogether. I find call park (cannot pickup) is broken in the last stage update.

So is it being worked on? Or reverted. I'd suggest to have it reverted until a patch is tested and known to work... anyone using stage to test against is stuck with a broken call pickup until then.

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl>> wrote:
Hi Joegen,

We have created an update for this patch to make BLF and Pick-up on Huntgroups possible. Please review attached patchfile and let us know what you think.
This has been tested by us with succes. We might have overlooked some stuff though, so feedback is welcome.


Kind regards,
Met vriendelijke groet,


Elwin Formsma
Telecats BV
-----
Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone] | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl<mailto:***@telecats.nl> |


_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org>
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/



--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tony Graziano, Manager
Telephone: [phone]
sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.net<mailto:***@voice.myitdepartment.net>
Fax: [phone]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Linked-In Profile:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4
Ask about our Internet Fax services!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Using or developing for sipXecs from SIPFoundry? Ask me about sipX-CoLab 2013!
[http://www.ezuce.com/image/image_gallery?uuid=61c95dd3-a26d-4363-95b1-131231e1edf0&groupId=284283&t=1340112036507%22+style=%22width:+310px;+height:+310px;]<http://sipxcolab2013.eventbrite.com/?discount=tony2013>


LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
Telephone: [phone]
sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.net<mailto:***@voice.myitdepartment.net>

Helpdesk Customers: http://myhelp.myitdepartment.net<http://myhelp.myitdepartment.net/>
Blog: http://blog.myitdepartment.net<http://blog.myitdepartment.net/>

[Melcon Moraes]

Hi, Elwin.

Can you provide a 32bits rpm so I can test it in here too?

-
MM


On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl>wrote:

> Tony,
>
> It was indeed reverted by Joegen (Ezuce).
> However the Subscribe following user forwarding is a big issue for us.
> Thats why we decided not to wait for a final fix in 4.6 since we are still
> on 4.4.
> We fixed the problems with huntgroups ourselfs, and hope this fix is
> usuable for Ezuce as well. Thats why im posting this patch to the user list.
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
>
> Elwin Formsma
> Telecats BV
> -----
> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
> | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>
> Op 14 dec. 2012, om 15:33 heeft Tony Graziano <
> ***@myitdepartment.net> het volgende geschreven:
>
> I'm a little lost. I thought this was going to be reverted altogether. I
> find call park (cannot pickup) is broken in the last stage update.
>
> So is it being worked on? Or reverted. I'd suggest to have it reverted
> until a patch is tested and known to work... anyone using stage to test
> against is stuck with a broken call pickup until then.
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Elwin Formsma <***@telecats.nl>wrote:
>
>> Hi Joegen,
>>
>> We have created an update for this patch to make BLF and Pick-up on
>> Huntgroups possible. Please review attached patchfile and let us know what
>> you think.
>> This has been tested by us with succes. We might have overlooked some
>> stuff though, so feedback is welcome.
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>
>>
>> Elwin Formsma
>> Telecats BV
>> -----
>> Elwin Formsma | Telecats bv | KvK Enschede 06069106 | Tel: [phone]
>> 44 | Fax: [phone] | E-mail: ***@telecats.nl |
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-users mailing list
>> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Tony Graziano, Manager
> Telephone: [phone]
> sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.net
> Fax: [phone]
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Linked-In Profile:
> http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4
> Ask about our Internet Fax services!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Using or developing for sipXecs from SIPFoundry? Ask me about sipX-CoLab
> 2013!
> <http://sipxcolab2013.eventbrite.com/?discount=tony2013>
>
>
> LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
> Telephone: [phone]
> sip: ***@voice.myitdepartment.**net<***@voice.myitdepartment.net>
>
> Helpdesk Customers: http://myhelp.myitdepartment.**net<http://myhelp.myitdepartment.net/>
> Blog: http://blog.myitdepartment.net
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> sipx-***@list.sipfoundry.org
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>