Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Brett Nemeroff
Hey All,
So I've recently upgraded my 1.4 install to 1.5 and I've noticed, I don't get INVITEs that are replied with a 503 stored in ACC anymore, the whole transaction is missing.

I used to get those. I haven't changed any of my acc params. :/

Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Brett


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Brett Nemeroff
Hello All,
I'm going to reply to my own message. I'm not sure if the upgrade actually had anything to do with this, but I suspect it did..

I log everything, failed, missed, acked, etc into one acc table. I was setting the acc flag right at the very very top of my script to just catch everything.

Well this worked great in 1.4, but in 1.5, it seems that failed transactions were getting skipped...

I always had the failed_transaction_flag defined, but I only set that flag in my failure route. For some reason, I wasn't getting failed transactions ever.

It's also notable that I used the carrierroute function, with only one valid route, the secondard route (domain) had a probability of 0 (ie: disabled). That may have contributed to this?

Anyway, I set the failed transaction flag at the top of the script as well, and it's working how I had expected. Not sure if something else broke when I did that, but my typical call flows seem to be logged properly now.

-Brett


On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brett Nemeroff <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey All,
So I've recently upgraded my 1.4 install to 1.5 and I've noticed, I don't get INVITEs that are replied with a 503 stored in ACC anymore, the whole transaction is missing.

I used to get those. I haven't changed any of my acc params. :/

Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Brett



_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Raúl Alexis Betancor Santana
On Monday 30 March 2009 21:34:29 Brett Nemeroff wrote:

> Hello All,
> I'm going to reply to my own message. I'm not sure if the upgrade actually
> had anything to do with this, but I suspect it did..
>
> I log everything, failed, missed, acked, etc into one acc table. I was
> setting the acc flag right at the very very top of my script to just catch
> everything.
>
> Well this worked great in 1.4, but in 1.5, it seems that failed
> transactions were getting skipped...
>
> I always had the failed_transaction_flag defined, but I only set that flag
> in my failure route. For some reason, I wasn't getting failed transactions
> ever.
>
> It's also notable that I used the carrierroute function, with only one
> valid route, the secondard route (domain) had a probability of 0 (ie:
> disabled). That may have contributed to this?
>
> Anyway, I set the failed transaction flag at the top of the script as well,
> and it's working how I had expected. Not sure if something else broke when
> I did that, but my typical call flows seem to be logged properly now.

AFAIK, it's a very bad idea to change flag status inside failure_route,
branch_route or reply_route. I suggest you to do it on route[] blocks, and
call it from failure_route.

For example, instead of something like:

failure_route[1]
{
  ....
  if(....)
    {
      setflag(15);
     ....
}

Just do:

route(XX):
{
  setflag(15);
}

...

failure_route[1]:
{
  ...
  if(...)
    {
      route(XX);
      ...
    }
...
}

--
Raúl Alexis Betancor Santana
Dimensión Virtual

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Brett Nemeroff
Raul,
This is very interesting, I did not know that. Can anyone explain the reason for this?

I always figured that calling a route from a failure/branch/onreply/etc route was the same as if the codeblock was in that section.

-Brett


2009/3/30 Raúl Alexis Betancor Santana <[hidden email]>
On Monday 30 March 2009 21:34:29 Brett Nemeroff wrote:
>
> I always had the failed_transaction_flag defined, but I only set that flag
> in my failure route. For some reason, I wasn't getting failed transactions
> ever.
AFAIK, it's a very bad idea to change flag status inside failure_route,
branch_route or reply_route. I suggest you to do it on route[] blocks, and
call it from failure_route.

For example, instead of something like:

failure_route[1]
{
 ....
 if(....)
   {
     setflag(15);
    ....
}

Just do:

route(XX):
{
 setflag(15);
}

...

failure_route[1]:
{
 ...
 if(...)
   {
     route(XX);
     ...
   }
...
}

--
Raúl Alexis Betancor Santana
Dimensión Virtual

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
In reply to this post by Raúl Alexis Betancor Santana
Hi Raul,

in both cases it is exactly the same. there is no difference between :).

Regards,
Bogdan

Raúl Alexis Betancor Santana wrote:

>
> AFAIK, it's a very bad idea to change flag status inside failure_route,
> branch_route or reply_route. I suggest you to do it on route[] blocks, and
> call it from failure_route.
>
> For example, instead of something like:
>
> failure_route[1]
> {
>   ....
>   if(....)
>     {
>       setflag(15);
>      ....
> }
>
> Just do:
>
> route(XX):
> {
>   setflag(15);
> }
>
> ...
>
> failure_route[1]:
> {
>   ...
>   if(...)
>     {
>       route(XX);
>       ...
>     }
> ...
> }
>
>  


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
In reply to this post by Brett Nemeroff
Hi Brett,

the transactions you miss in the acc are replied in failure_route with
t_reply() or you are passing the received reply ?

also, are you sharing the "failed_transaction_flag" with other flags ?

Regards,
Bogdan

Brett Nemeroff wrote:

> Hello All,
> I'm going to reply to my own message. I'm not sure if the upgrade
> actually had anything to do with this, but I suspect it did..
>
> I log everything, failed, missed, acked, etc into one acc table. I was
> setting the acc flag right at the very very top of my script to just
> catch everything.
>
> Well this worked great in 1.4, but in 1.5, it seems that failed
> transactions were getting skipped...
>
> I always had the failed_transaction_flag defined, but I only set that
> flag in my failure route. For some reason, I wasn't getting failed
> transactions ever.
>
> It's also notable that I used the carrierroute function, with only one
> valid route, the secondard route (domain) had a probability of 0 (ie:
> disabled). That may have contributed to this?
>
> Anyway, I set the failed transaction flag at the top of the script as
> well, and it's working how I had expected. Not sure if something else
> broke when I did that, but my typical call flows seem to be logged
> properly now.
>
> -Brett
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brett Nemeroff <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hey All,
>     So I've recently upgraded my 1.4 install to 1.5 and I've noticed,
>     I don't get INVITEs that are replied with a 503 stored in ACC
>     anymore, the whole transaction is missing.
>
>     I used to get those. I haven't changed any of my acc params. :/
>
>     Am I missing something?
>     Thanks,
>     Brett
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>  


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Brett Nemeroff
Bogdan,
RURI modified by carrierroute, then t_relay(). Far end replies with 503. Call carrierroute again, which errors since the only other route has a prob=0. Without the failed_transaction_flag actually armed before the failure_route, I get no database activitiy at all..

Nothing else is using that flag. I have it set at the top of my failure_routes and my main acc flag set at the very top of the main routing block.



On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Brett,

the transactions you miss in the acc are replied in failure_route with t_reply() or you are passing the received reply ?

also, are you sharing the "failed_transaction_flag" with other flags ?

Regards,
Bogdan

Brett Nemeroff wrote:
Hello All,
I'm going to reply to my own message. I'm not sure if the upgrade actually had anything to do with this, but I suspect it did..

I log everything, failed, missed, acked, etc into one acc table. I was setting the acc flag right at the very very top of my script to just catch everything.

Well this worked great in 1.4, but in 1.5, it seems that failed transactions were getting skipped...

I always had the failed_transaction_flag defined, but I only set that flag in my failure route. For some reason, I wasn't getting failed transactions ever.

It's also notable that I used the carrierroute function, with only one valid route, the secondard route (domain) had a probability of 0 (ie: disabled). That may have contributed to this?

Anyway, I set the failed transaction flag at the top of the script as well, and it's working how I had expected. Not sure if something else broke when I did that, but my typical call flows seem to be logged properly now.

-Brett


On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brett Nemeroff <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

   Hey All,
   So I've recently upgraded my 1.4 install to 1.5 and I've noticed,
   I don't get INVITEs that are replied with a 503 stored in ACC
   anymore, the whole transaction is missing.

   I used to get those. I haven't changed any of my acc params. :/

   Am I missing something?
   Thanks,
   Brett


------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
 



_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
Brett Nemeroff wrote:
> Bogdan,
> RURI modified by carrierroute, then t_relay(). Far end replies with
> 503. Call carrierroute again, which errors since the only other route
> has a prob=0.
ok, but after the cc fails, you sent out a reply with t_reply() or you
let the received 503 to propagate to the UAC?
> Without the failed_transaction_flag actually armed before the
> failure_route, I get no database activitiy at all..
so, if you set it before the failure_route it works, otherwise ok, right?

Regards,
Bogdan

>
> Nothing else is using that flag. I have it set at the top of my
> failure_routes and my main acc flag set at the very top of the main
> routing block.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Brett,
>
>     the transactions you miss in the acc are replied in failure_route
>     with t_reply() or you are passing the received reply ?
>
>     also, are you sharing the "failed_transaction_flag" with other flags ?
>
>     Regards,
>     Bogdan
>
>     Brett Nemeroff wrote:
>
>         Hello All,
>         I'm going to reply to my own message. I'm not sure if the
>         upgrade actually had anything to do with this, but I suspect
>         it did..
>
>         I log everything, failed, missed, acked, etc into one acc
>         table. I was setting the acc flag right at the very very top
>         of my script to just catch everything.
>
>         Well this worked great in 1.4, but in 1.5, it seems that
>         failed transactions were getting skipped...
>
>         I always had the failed_transaction_flag defined, but I only
>         set that flag in my failure route. For some reason, I wasn't
>         getting failed transactions ever.
>
>         It's also notable that I used the carrierroute function, with
>         only one valid route, the secondard route (domain) had a
>         probability of 0 (ie: disabled). That may have contributed to
>         this?
>
>         Anyway, I set the failed transaction flag at the top of the
>         script as well, and it's working how I had expected. Not sure
>         if something else broke when I did that, but my typical call
>         flows seem to be logged properly now.
>
>         -Brett
>
>
>         On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brett Nemeroff
>         <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>
>            Hey All,
>            So I've recently upgraded my 1.4 install to 1.5 and I've
>         noticed,
>            I don't get INVITEs that are replied with a 503 stored in ACC
>            anymore, the whole transaction is missing.
>
>            I used to get those. I haven't changed any of my acc params. :/
>
>            Am I missing something?
>            Thanks,
>            Brett
>
>
>         ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Users mailing list
>         [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>          
>
>
>


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Brett Nemeroff
I explicitly sent out a t_reply on failure.

And yes, it seems that I need to set it prior to the failure route.. however, it's before everything in the config now. so I'm not sure really what it needs to be before.. maybe the original t_relay in which the call failed.

BTW, I'm using the dialog module if that changes anything...



On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[hidden email]> wrote:
Brett Nemeroff wrote:
Bogdan,
RURI modified by carrierroute, then t_relay(). Far end replies with 503. Call carrierroute again, which errors since the only other route has a prob=0.
ok, but after the cc fails, you sent out a reply with t_reply() or you let the received 503 to propagate to the UAC?

Without the failed_transaction_flag actually armed before the failure_route, I get no database activitiy at all..
so, if you set it before the failure_route it works, otherwise ok, right?

Regards,
Bogdan

Nothing else is using that flag. I have it set at the top of my failure_routes and my main acc flag set at the very top of the main routing block.



On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

   Hi Brett,

   the transactions you miss in the acc are replied in failure_route
   with t_reply() or you are passing the received reply ?

   also, are you sharing the "failed_transaction_flag" with other flags ?

   Regards,
   Bogdan

   Brett Nemeroff wrote:

       Hello All,
       I'm going to reply to my own message. I'm not sure if the
       upgrade actually had anything to do with this, but I suspect
       it did..

       I log everything, failed, missed, acked, etc into one acc
       table. I was setting the acc flag right at the very very top
       of my script to just catch everything.

       Well this worked great in 1.4, but in 1.5, it seems that
       failed transactions were getting skipped...

       I always had the failed_transaction_flag defined, but I only
       set that flag in my failure route. For some reason, I wasn't
       getting failed transactions ever.

       It's also notable that I used the carrierroute function, with
       only one valid route, the secondard route (domain) had a
       probability of 0 (ie: disabled). That may have contributed to
       this?

       Anyway, I set the failed transaction flag at the top of the
       script as well, and it's working how I had expected. Not sure
       if something else broke when I did that, but my typical call
       flows seem to be logged properly now.

       -Brett


       On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brett Nemeroff
       <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
       <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:

          Hey All,
          So I've recently upgraded my 1.4 install to 1.5 and I've
       noticed,
          I don't get INVITEs that are replied with a 503 stored in ACC
          anymore, the whole transaction is missing.

          I used to get those. I haven't changed any of my acc params. :/

          Am I missing something?
          Thanks,
          Brett


       ------------------------------------------------------------------------



       _______________________________________________
       Users mailing list
       [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>



_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes in ACC Modules for 1.5?

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
Hi Brett,

I just tried to reproduce what you described - I have a simple setup
(based on the script) I tried the following configurations:

1) missed_call flag set in the request_route only -> log record generated
2) missed_call flag set in failure_route only -> log record generated
3) missed_call not set at all -> no record.

The scenario was calling to an inexiting server, so an internal 48 was
generated. The failure_route() was doing only setflag(missed_call).

Regards,
Bogdan

Brett Nemeroff wrote:

> I explicitly sent out a t_reply on failure.
>
> And yes, it seems that I need to set it prior to the failure route..
> however, it's before everything in the config now. so I'm not sure
> really what it needs to be before.. maybe the original t_relay in
> which the call failed.
>
> BTW, I'm using the dialog module if that changes anything...
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Brett Nemeroff wrote:
>
>         Bogdan,
>         RURI modified by carrierroute, then t_relay(). Far end replies
>         with 503. Call carrierroute again, which errors since the only
>         other route has a prob=0.
>
>     ok, but after the cc fails, you sent out a reply with t_reply() or
>     you let the received 503 to propagate to the UAC?
>
>         Without the failed_transaction_flag actually armed before the
>         failure_route, I get no database activitiy at all..
>
>     so, if you set it before the failure_route it works, otherwise ok,
>     right?
>
>     Regards,
>     Bogdan
>
>
>         Nothing else is using that flag. I have it set at the top of
>         my failure_routes and my main acc flag set at the very top of
>         the main routing block.
>
>
>
>         On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>         <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         <mailto:[hidden email]
>         <mailto:[hidden email]>>> wrote:
>
>            Hi Brett,
>
>            the transactions you miss in the acc are replied in
>         failure_route
>            with t_reply() or you are passing the received reply ?
>
>            also, are you sharing the "failed_transaction_flag" with
>         other flags ?
>
>            Regards,
>            Bogdan
>
>            Brett Nemeroff wrote:
>
>                Hello All,
>                I'm going to reply to my own message. I'm not sure if the
>                upgrade actually had anything to do with this, but I
>         suspect
>                it did..
>
>                I log everything, failed, missed, acked, etc into one acc
>                table. I was setting the acc flag right at the very
>         very top
>                of my script to just catch everything.
>
>                Well this worked great in 1.4, but in 1.5, it seems that
>                failed transactions were getting skipped...
>
>                I always had the failed_transaction_flag defined, but I
>         only
>                set that flag in my failure route. For some reason, I
>         wasn't
>                getting failed transactions ever.
>
>                It's also notable that I used the carrierroute
>         function, with
>                only one valid route, the secondard route (domain) had a
>                probability of 0 (ie: disabled). That may have
>         contributed to
>                this?
>
>                Anyway, I set the failed transaction flag at the top of the
>                script as well, and it's working how I had expected.
>         Not sure
>                if something else broke when I did that, but my typical
>         call
>                flows seem to be logged properly now.
>
>                -Brett
>
>
>                On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brett Nemeroff
>                <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>                <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>> wrote:
>
>                   Hey All,
>                   So I've recently upgraded my 1.4 install to 1.5 and I've
>                noticed,
>                   I don't get INVITEs that are replied with a 503
>         stored in ACC
>                   anymore, the whole transaction is missing.
>
>                   I used to get those. I haven't changed any of my acc
>         params. :/
>
>                   Am I missing something?
>                   Thanks,
>                   Brett
>
>
>              
>          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>                _______________________________________________
>                Users mailing list
>                [hidden email]
>         <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         <mailto:[hidden email]
>         <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>
>                http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>                
>
>
>
>


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users