[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0017379]: [patch] Notify event keep-alive is responded with bad event

[Asterisk Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=17379 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                rsw686
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   17379
Category:                   Channels/chan_sip/General
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   minor
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     ready for testing
Asterisk Version:           1.6.2.8-rc1 
JIRA:                       SWP-1811 
Regression:                 No 
Reviewboard Link:            
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): N/A 
SVN Revision (number only!):  
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2010-05-23 21:19 CDT
Last Modified:              2010-07-22 08:50 CDT
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    [patch] Notify event keep-alive is responded with
bad event
Description: 
Looking through chan_sip.c I see that there is support for returning a 200
OK for a notify keep-alive event. However Asterisk is sending a Bad event
response complaining about the call-id. 

[May 23 22:07:39] DEBUG[6668]: chan_sip.c:22046 handle_request_do: Invalid
SIP message - rejected , no callid, len 313
<--- SIP read from UDP:10.10.5.128:5060 --->
NOTIFY sip:10.10.5.16 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.5.128:5060;branch=z9hG4bK-5f632398
From: <sip:110 at 10.10.5.16>;tag=a05c065adebc52bco0
To: <sip:10.10.5.16>
Call-ID: 57768572-7ae21e84 at 10.10.5.128
CSeq: 322 NOTIFY
Max-Forwards: 70
Event: keep-alive
User-Agent: Linksys/SPA941-5.1.8
Content-Length: 0


<------------->
--- (10 headers 0 lines) ---
[May 23 22:07:40] DEBUG[6668]: acl.c:506 ast_ouraddrfor: Found IP address
for this socket
[May 23 22:07:40] DEBUG[6668]: chan_sip.c:3682 ast_sip_ouraddrfor: Setting
SIP_TRANSPORT_UDP with address 10.10.5.16:5060

<--- Transmitting (no NAT) to 10.10.5.128:5060 --->
SIP/2.0 489 Bad event
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
10.10.5.128:5060;branch=z9hG4bK-5f632398;received=10.10.5.128
From: <sip:110 at 10.10.5.16>;tag=a05c065adebc52bco0
To: <sip:10.10.5.16>;tag=as4cad60c7
Call-ID: 57768572-7ae21e84 at 10.10.5.128
CSeq: 322 NOTIFY
Server: Asterisk PBX 1.6.2.8-rc1
Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, INFO
Supported: replaces, timer
Content-Length: 0


<------------>
[May 23 22:07:40] DEBUG[6668]: chan_sip.c:3561 __sip_xmit: Trying to put
'SIP/2.0 489' onto UDP socket destined for 10.10.5.128      :5060

======================================================================
Relationships       ID      Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------------
has duplicate       0017532 [patch] Linksys SPA94x keep-alive reply...
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0124847) pabelanger (manager) - 2010-07-22 08:50
 https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=17379#c124847 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Goodness? We send '483 Bad Event' because asterisk does not understand the
previous event (see below).

---
7.3.2. "489 Bad Event" Response Code

   The 489 event response is added to the "Client-Error" header field
   definition. "489 Bad Event" is used to indicate that the server did
   not understand the event package specified in a "Event" header field.
---

That said, your NOTIFY event is different.  This patch is to help handle
keep-alive message (for NATs), your events seems to notify you about
voicemail.

So your statement is correct, this patch will not help you in this
situation because you and the reporter are doing 2 different things. 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2010-07-22 08:50 pabelanger     Note Added: 0124847                          
======================================================================