Recent content by DigitalDaz

Your issue is NAT anyway. The 32 second thing is a classic tell tale the ACK will not be getting to where it needs to be and I'm guessing you will be getting repeated 200OKs. The recovery on timer expire also indicates this. Are you able to post a pcap of the carrier leg of the call.

So is this question about fusionpbx or fspbx? Your post implies fusionpbx but this is the fspbx forum?

I don't believe its the nat detection, if the sip registration doesn't send it then its just not there, as mentioned above maybe pbxgeek can confirm, a quick scan of the current code showed that the call-id header wasn't being checked for local ips which in some configurations/algs means the...

I understand, as I mentioned, this is not something anywhere in the sip protocol, Mark just discovered it. I personally think it is a bad thing in principle. If you are trying to conceal your LAN infrastructure an IP phone should not be revealing it by putting it in the call-id. I know it is...

It is NOT the same as FusionPBX and I'm not sure why you thought it would be. My understanding is most has been rewritten. It doesn't look like fspbx does look at the call-id field to try and get the ip but as I mentioned above, this is completely non-standard and just done by some phones...

Actually, I just got claude to look through the fusionpbx registrations.php Here's how the lan-ip field gets determined, in app/registrations/resources/classes/registrations.php:237-261. The logic is a chain of fallbacks, applied per registration row pulled from FreeSWITCH's sofia status...

Al lot of this has nothing at all to do with freeswitch/fusionpbx/fspbx, etc Let me give you an example, I've changed sensitive information on this one it is shown as just TCP, I guess that is because freeswitch doesn't know about the callid: REGISTER sip:abc.xxx.com:5060 SIP/2.0 Via...

I've been in this for over 15 years now and have never seen any 'best practice' docs anywhere.

I noticed you have been doing some provisioning work recently, eg the RPS integration and it made me recall an idea I have had for some time that I think enhances security further. I know that the would be hackers are constantly trying to obtain thos config files. In a job I had a few years...

@babak Good to see you again, I have been worried about you, I haven't seen you on IRC :)

I added this category because I love smartos. I would definitely like to revisit it sometime. We did it in smartos zones though. It was of limited success though. In a zone, you couldn't use anything other than UDP which was severely limiting. I'm talking well over 10 years ago now. I doubt...

It doesn't do it for me at all. Why? It looks like something I could probably put together with AI if I wanted it anyway I'm not installing any third party binary onto a PBX that I don't have visibility of, except perhaps those that come from @markjcrane himself. This forums has existed for the...

They will try accessing from potentially different locations when I set it up a while ago and they did not provide a list then. According to AI: Let's Encrypt does not provide a fixed list of IP addresses for their validation servers, and their IP allocations change without notice. Because of...

If this is definitely the case, it should be raised as a bug, @markjcrane will probably fix this very quickly if he is aware.

In FusionPBX mine are set as in the image and work just fine: