[Home]

Summary:ASTERISK-06832: Nonce blanked
Reporter:nivlekch (nivlekch)Labels:
Date Opened:2006-04-22 23:52:53Date Closed:2006-04-23 01:23:29
Priority:MajorRegression?No
Status:Closed/CompleteComponents:Channels/chan_sip/Registration
Versions:Frequency of
Occurrence
Related
Issues:
Environment:Attachments:
Description:asterisk (as client) -------> registers ------------> zte-softswitch
zte-ss ----> 401 (nonce="33d65fb8c5d005ec629389d02dcb0069") ----> ast
ast -------------> register with blank nonce! ----------> zte-ss
this phenomenon does not exist in 1.0.9

****** ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ******

Server hardware: P4-2.66 LGA Asus P5S800 80gb sata 512mb ram
OS: fedora core 4 updated to lastest via yum
asterisk 1.2.5(stable) with zaptel digium 4fxo (asterisk addons, asterisk sounds)

i think i encountered something like a bug in chan_sip (asterisk 1.2.5 stable). i have here a registration from 2 clients, one x-lite and the other asterisk both registering to a ZTE softswitch.

here is the x-lite register:

SEND TIME: 4623798
SEND >> z.t.e.ip:5060
REGISTER sip:z.t.e.ip SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP xl.it.e.ip:5060;rport;branch=z9hG4bK9A016B6D37C5401FA145A115DB31F84B
From: 468908012 <sip:468908012@z.t.e.ip>;tag=3393221447
To: 468908012 <sip:468908012@z.t.e.ip>
Contact: "468908012" <sip:468908012@xl.it.e.ip:5060>
Call-ID: EF854A74793C488AB7A042419E8F5041@z.t.e.ip <mailto:EF854A74793C488AB7A042419E8F5041@z.t.e.ip>
CSeq: 59447 REGISTER
Expires: 1800
Max-Forwards: 70
User-Agent: X-Lite release 1105x
Content-Length: 0


RECEIVE TIME: 4624083
RECEIVE << z.t.e.ip:5060
SIP/2.0 401 Unauthorized
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.2:5060;received=xl.it.e.ip;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK9A016B6D37C5401FA145A115DB31F84B
To: "468908012"<sip:468908012@z.t.e.ip>
From: "468908012"<sip:468908012@z.t.e.ip>;tag=3393221447
Call-ID: EF854A74793C488AB7A042419E8F5041@z.t.e.ip <mailto:EF854A74793C488AB7A042419E8F5041@z.t.e.ip>
CSeq: 59447 REGISTER
User-Agent: ZTE-SoftSwitch
WWW-Authenticate: Digest realm="zte",
nonce="ac9a564a4596a4a846d61059cc6da593",
ZTE-ID=9d1a000388fa151f81232880c319fb50


SEND TIME: 4624107
SEND >> z.t.e.ip:5060
REGISTER sip:z.t.e.ip SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP xl.it.e.ip:5060;rport;branch=z9hG4bK140232B2DA0D4F38A829F8C6645CD899
From: 468908012 <sip:468908012@z.t.e.ip>;tag=3393221447
To: 468908012 <sip:468908012@z.t.e.ip>
Contact: "468908012" <sip:468908012@xl.it.e.ip:5060>
Call-ID: EF854A74793C488AB7A042419E8F5041@z.t.e.ip <mailto:EF854A74793C488AB7A042419E8F5041@z.t.e.ip>
CSeq: 59448 REGISTER
Expires: 1800
Authorization: Digest username="468908012",realm="zte",nonce="ac9a564a4596a4a846d61059cc6da593",response="625862ad39a9689b34343f4f73485935",uri="sip:z.t.e.ip"
Max-Forwards: 70
User-Agent: X-Lite release 1105x
Content-Length: 0


RECEIVE TIME: 4626154
RECEIVE << z.t.e.ip:5060
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.2:5060;received=xl.it.e.ip;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK140232B2DA0D4F38A829F8C6645CD899
To: "468908012"<sip:468908012@z.t.e.ip>
From: "468908012"<sip:468908012@z.t.e.ip>;tag=3393221447
Call-ID: EF854A74793C488AB7A042419E8F5041@z.t.e.ip <mailto:EF854A74793C488AB7A042419E8F5041@z.t.e.ip>
CSeq: 59448 REGISTER
Contact: "468908012"<sip:468908012@xl.it.e.ip:5060>;expires=180
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 19:26:29 GMT
User-Agent: ZTE-SoftSwitch


for the xlite registering to zte softswitch, everythings ok. but take a look at this trace where asterisk 1.2.5 is registering to zte softswitch.


Retransmitting #1 (no NAT) to z.t.e.ip:5060:
REGISTER sip:z.t.e.ip SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP as.te.risk.ip:5060;branch=z9hG4bK122f51f7;rport
From: <sip:468908013@z.t.e.ip>;tag=as59012e3f
To: <sip:468908013@z.t.e.ip>
Call-ID: 035585760cf6a363146209ac30fc0c85@192.168.1.2 <mailto:035585760cf6a363146209ac30fc0c85@192.168.1.2>
CSeq: 103 REGISTER
User-Agent: Asterisk 1.2.5
Max-Forwards: 70
Authorization: Digest username="468908013", realm="zte", algorithm=MD5, uri="sip:z.t.e.ip", nonce="", response="c93d8de96f8df498a6b62c6214756b83", opaque=""
Expires: 120
Contact: <sip:468908013@as.te.risk.ip>
Event: registration
Content-Length: 0


---

<-- SIP read from z.t.e.ip:5060:
SIP/2.0 401 Unauthorized
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.2:5060;received=as.te.risk.ip;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK122f51f7
To: <sip:468908013@z.t.e.ip>
From: <sip:468908013@z.t.e.ip>;tag=as59012e3f
Call-ID: 035585760cf6a363146209ac30fc0c85@192.168.1.2 <mailto:035585760cf6a363146209ac30fc0c85@192.168.1.2>
CSeq: 103 REGISTER
User-Agent: ZTE-SoftSwitch
WWW-Authenticate: Digest realm="zte",
nonce="33d65fb8c5d005ec629389d02dcb0069",
ZTE-ID=2df43ba91cd57008b62cf9008b3503a4
Event: registration


--- (11 headers 0 lines)---
Responding to challenge, registration to domain/host name z.t.e.ip
REGISTER 13 headers, 0 lines
Reliably Transmitting (no NAT) to z.t.e.ip:5060:
REGISTER sip:z.t.e.ip SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP as.te.risk.ip:5060;branch=z9hG4bK39832c2b;rport
From: <sip:468908013@z.t.e.ip>;tag=as209d1d21
To: <sip:468908013@z.t.e.ip>
Call-ID: 035585760cf6a363146209ac30fc0c85@192.168.1.2 <mailto:035585760cf6a363146209ac30fc0c85@192.168.1.2>
CSeq: 104 REGISTER
User-Agent: Asterisk 1.2.5
Max-Forwards: 70
Authorization: Digest username="468908013", realm="zte", algorithm=MD5, uri="sip:z.t.e.ip", nonce="", response="c93d8de96f8df498a6b62c6214756b83", opaque=""
Expires: 120
Contact: <sip:468908013@as.te.risk.ip>
Event: registration
Content-Length: 0


take special interest in the nonce value, asterisk is using a blank nonce. this issue does not exist in asterisk version 1.0.9...

can anybody point out where this went wrong? i have been reviewing chan_sip.c lately to try to create a patch but i can't seem to find the problem. anybody with *experience* out there? (asterisk 1.2.7 came out but no mention of this in changelog) i'm stuck with 1.0.9
Comments:By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2006-04-23 01:15:02

Please test if this also happens with svn trunk. I've never seen this before.
By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2006-04-23 01:18:05

Oh, I see it. You need to turn on "pedantic=yes" to support multiline responses. Turn that on, and we'll read the nonce.
By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2006-04-23 01:22:47

Already documented in sip.conf.sample
By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2006-04-23 01:23:28

Next time, please add debug output as an attachment, not inline in the bug report. Thanks!