< Previous by Date	Date Index	Next by Date >
< Previous in Thread	Thread Index

Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message

From: Karlsson <boost.regex@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 23:45:23 +0800

Sorry for all, I found my source code:

void UserAgent::onUpdatePending(ClientSubscriptionHandle h, const SipMessage& notify, bool outOfOrder)
{
    DialogSetId inviteID(notify);
    long callID = (long)inviteID.getCallId().hash();

    Contents * contents = notify.getContents();
    if (!contents)
    {
        h->rejectUpdate();
        return;
    }

the h->rejectUpdate(); generated this error.

At first I just set the break point on onUpdateExtension onUpdateActive two callback functions, fotgot set the break point on this funciton.

Sorry for waste your time.

I'm sorry.

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 11:40 PM, Byron Campen <bcampen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

It looks like the 400 is being sent in the onUpdatePending() callback. I can't find any code that might be catching an exception and sending that 400, for the code-path the NOTIFY is going through.

Best regards,
Byron Campen

Hi Byron, please found the log in attachment and let me know if need I provide other information.

Thanks

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 11:24 PM, Byron Campen <bcampen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Can you send the resip logging? Looking at the parse code, it looks like we are ignoring the "=on", so maybe that isn't what is going on.

Best regards,
Byron Campen

Hi Robert, I'm using resiprocate 1.3.4, and I have sent the log with my two previous emails.

I saw the counterpath bria using resiprocate, but why it's working fine with same server ?

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:52 PM, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Values on the lr parameter have historically been encountered in the wild
(there was one stack (not this one) that would crash without them and it took a long long time to get that fixed)

Those values are not supposed to be there, but following Postel's maxim, they should be ignored if they occur.

I am making the right guesses after looking at the thread, its not a resiprocate based product thats generating

the 400, correct? (If that's not correct, and its something in the stack and not the application above the stack
doing it, we should make things a little more gentle - assuming Byron's right about it being the lr parameter

value that toasting your flow in the first place).

RjS

On Jul 21, 2008, at 9:35 AM, Byron Campen wrote:

Then bria is broken. From 3261:

lr-param = "lr"

Best regards,
Byron Campen

But this NOTIFY is send by Bria, if both side using the bria, then it working fine, does not received this 400 bad request.

Thanks

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:18 PM, Byron Campen <bcampen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I bet it is the "lr=on" in the Record-Route. This is invalid.

Best regards,
Byron Campen

Hi all, I try to implement the PRESENCE by reSIProcate - dum, but I send SUBSCRIBE to server, server replied me 202 accepted,
and it send NOTIFY to me later, but the DUM replied "400 Bad request " when it received the NOTIFY, how to do ?

I have wrote these code:

    mMasterProfile->addSupportedMethod(NOTIFY);
    mMasterProfile->addSupportedMimeType(NOTIFY, Mime("message", "sipfrag"));
    mMasterProfile->addSupportedMimeType(NOTIFY, Mime("application", "simple-message-summary"));
    mMasterProfile->addSupportedMimeType(NOTIFY, Pidf::getStaticType());
    mMasterProfile->addSupportedMimeType(MESSAGE, Mime("text", "plain"));

There is the logs:

SUBSCRIBE sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.128:6684;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-e563f4337b37c544-1---d8754z-;rport
Max-Forwards: 70
Contact: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:6684>
To: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060>
From: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxx>;tag=e623f860
Call-ID: MTZmMDhlZjViZjEwZGE0NWQ4NWI4YzQwNDUxNmFlM2Y.
CSeq: 2 SUBSCRIBE
Expires: 3600
Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, UPDATE, NOTIFY, REFER, REGISTER, SUBSCRIBE, MESSAGE, INFO
Proxy-Authorization: Digest

username="testuser1",realm="iptel.org",nonce="48843fd748843fcdcc6b39d482de0048ab5656a87988b0a6",uri="sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060",response="a3ed7c2d5c27de671c8c5e7c4bc1a84

3",algorithm=MD5
Supported: replaces
User-Agent: TEST PHONE
Event: presence
Content-Length: 0

SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.128:6684;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-6a7fdd0750244763-1---d8754z-;rport=2591;received=222.244.116.11
To: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060>;tag=b98f1230ac1a7949bf499aa7f9ea7038.49b5
From: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxx>;tag=e623f860
Call-ID: MTZmMDhlZjViZjEwZGE0NWQ4NWI4YzQwNDUxNmFlM2Y.
CSeq: 1 SUBSCRIBE
Proxy-Authenticate: Digest realm="iptel.org", nonce="48843fd748843fcdcc6b39d482de0048ab5656a87988b0a6"
Server: Sip EXpress router (2.1.0-dev21-tcp (i386/linux))
Content-Length: 0
Warning: 392 213.192.59.75:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=442 req_src_ip=222.244.116.11 req_src_port=2591 in_uri=sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060

out_uri=sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060 via_cnt==1"

SUBSCRIBE sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.128:6684;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-e563f4337b37c544-1---d8754z-;rport
Max-Forwards: 70
Contact: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:6684>
To: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060>
From: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxx>;tag=e623f860
Call-ID: MTZmMDhlZjViZjEwZGE0NWQ4NWI4YzQwNDUxNmFlM2Y.
CSeq: 2 SUBSCRIBE
Expires: 3600
Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, UPDATE, NOTIFY, REFER, REGISTER, SUBSCRIBE, MESSAGE, INFO
Proxy-Authorization: Digest

username="testuser1",realm="iptel.org",nonce="48843fd748843fcdcc6b39d482de0048ab5656a87988b0a6",uri="sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060",response="a3ed7c2d5c27de671c8c5e7c4bc1a84

3",algorithm=MD5
Supported: replaces
User-Agent: TEST PHONE
Event: presence
Content-Length: 0

SIP/2.0 202 Accepted
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.128:6684;received=222.244.116.11;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-e563f4337b37c544-1---d8754z-;rport=2591
Record-Route: <sip:213.192.59.75;lr;avp=mV0BBwB1YWNfbmF0AQAAAA>
Contact: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:63999;rinstance=b6d39b43e1696b09>
To: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060>;tag=a714b457
From: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxx>;tag=e623f860
Call-ID: MTZmMDhlZjViZjEwZGE0NWQ4NWI4YzQwNDUxNmFlM2Y.
CSeq: 2 SUBSCRIBE
Expires: 3600
User-Agent: Bria release 2.3 stamp 47296
Content-Length: 0

NOTIFY sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:2591 SIP/2.0
Record-Route: <sip:213.192.59.75;avp=VEABBwB1YWNfbmF0AQAAAAEHAHVhY19uYXQBAAAA;lr=on>
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 213.192.59.75;branch=z9hG4bK88ec.638e082.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.30:40088;received=222.244.116.11;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-9078724d573ba36b-1---d8754z-;rport=63999
Max-Forwards: 16
Contact: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:63999;rinstance=b6d39b43e1696b09>
To: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxx>;tag=e623f860
From: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060>;tag=a714b457
Call-ID: MTZmMDhlZjViZjEwZGE0NWQ4NWI4YzQwNDUxNmFlM2Y.
CSeq: 2 NOTIFY
User-Agent: Bria release 2.3 stamp 47296
Subscription-State: pending;expires=3600
Event: presence
Content-Length: 0
P-hint: rr-enforced

SIP/2.0 400 Bad Request
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 213.192.59.75;branch=z9hG4bK88ec.638e082.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.30:40088;received=222.244.116.11;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-9078724d573ba36b-1---d8754z-;rport=63999
To: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxx>;tag=e623f860
From: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060>;tag=a714b457
Call-ID: MTZmMDhlZjViZjEwZGE0NWQ4NWI4YzQwNDUxNmFlM2Y.
CSeq: 2 NOTIFY
User-Agent: TEST PHONE
Content-Length: 0

NOTIFY sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:2591 SIP/2.0
Record-Route: <sip:213.192.59.75;avp=VEABBwB1YWNfbmF0AQAAAAEHAHVhY19uYXQBAAAA;lr=on>
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 213.192.59.75;branch=z9hG4bK88ec.638e082.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.30:40088;received=222.244.116.11;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-9078724d573ba36b-1---d8754z-;rport=63999
Max-Forwards: 16
Contact: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:63999;rinstance=b6d39b43e1696b09>
To: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxx>;tag=e623f860
From: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060>;tag=a714b457
Call-ID: MTZmMDhlZjViZjEwZGE0NWQ4NWI4YzQwNDUxNmFlM2Y.
CSeq: 2 NOTIFY
User-Agent: Bria release 2.3 stamp 47296
Subscription-State: pending;expires=3600
Event: presence
Content-Length: 0
P-hint: rr-enforced

SIP/2.0 400 Bad Request
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 213.192.59.75;branch=z9hG4bK88ec.638e082.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.30:40088;received=222.244.116.11;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-9078724d573ba36b-1---d8754z-;rport=63999
To: <sip:testuser1@xxxxxxxxx>;tag=e623f860
From: <sip:testuser2@xxxxxxxxx:5060>;tag=a714b457
Call-ID: MTZmMDhlZjViZjEwZGE0NWQ4NWI4YzQwNDUxNmFlM2Y.
CSeq: 2 NOTIFY
User-Agent: TEST PHONE
Content-Length: 0

_______________________________________________

resiprocate-users mailing list
resiprocate-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List Archive: http://list.resiprocate.org/archive/resiprocate-users/

_______________________________________________
resiprocate-users mailing list
resiprocate-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List Archive: http://list.resiprocate.org/archive/resiprocate-users/

<log.txt>

References:
- [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
  - From: Karlsson
- Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
  - From: Byron Campen
- Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
  - From: Karlsson
- Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
  - From: Byron Campen
- Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
  - From: Robert Sparks
- Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
  - From: Karlsson
- Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
  - From: Byron Campen
- Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
  - From: Karlsson
- Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
  - From: Byron Campen

Prev by Date: Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
Next by Date: [reSIProcate-users] reSIP and reTurn
Previous by thread: Re: [reSIProcate-users] The Dum says 400 Bad request when received a NOTIFY message
Next by thread: [reSIProcate-users] reSIP and reTurn
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread