Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Siproxd - call failed - operation not permitted

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved pfSense Packages
    4 Posts 2 Posters 3.2k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • X
      xibalba
      last edited by

      Hello,
      I'm running siproxd 0.6.0 and cannot seem to get any of my phones working.Siproxd is spewing out the following error constantly. any advice?

      running 1.2-RELEASE.
      I tried building the 0.7.0 package on another freebsd, scp'd it over along with libosip3. delete libosip2 and siproxd-0.6.0 and added the newer versions. I still received this error until I changed the user = root from user = nobody

      13:47:55 ERROR:sock.c:175 sendto() [204.14.39.36:5060 size=649] call failed: Operation not permitted

      here is my config
      if_inbound = vr0
      if_outbound = rl0
      sip_listen_port = 5060
      daemonize = 0
      silence_log = 0
      log_calls = 1
      user = root <– when set to nobody i receive the error above
      chrootjail = /usr/local/siproxd/
      registration_file = siproxd_registrations
      pid_file = siproxd.pid
      rtp_proxy_enable = 1
      rtp_port_low = 7070
      rtp_port_high = 7079
      rtp_timeout = 300
      default_expires = 300
      debug_level = 0x00000000
      outbound_proxy_host = las-obproxy.*****.us
      outbound_proxy_port = 5060
      :(

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • X
        xibalba
        last edited by

        after switching the user in siproxd.conf to root it seemed to work for a few days then started throwing the "call failed" error again. Switching the user back to 'nobody' didn't seem to fix it either. I removed both the packages siproxd-0.7.0 and libosip-3.0.1, reinstalled them and siproxd seems to have stopped throwing that error.
        anyone have any thoughts on why sendto() is failing for siproxd?

        09:51:01 siproxd.c:320 back from sipsock_wait
        09:51:01 security.c:48 security_check_raw: size=562
        09:51:01 register.c:238 sip_register:
        09:51:01 sip_utils.c:772 looking for magic cookie [z9hG4bK9e63911FFC8E92]
        09:51:01 sip_utils.c:786 existing branch -> branch hash [ecb3ad80fc56fa4c103f998cee1e35ff]
        09:51:01 sip_utils.c:586 adding VIA:SIP/2.0/UDP 70.166.35.44:5060;branch=z9hG4bKecb3ad80fc56fa4c103f998cee1e35ff
        09:51:01 ERROR:sock.c:175 sendto() [204.14.39.36:5060 size=645] call failed: Operation not permitted
        09:51:01 siproxd.c:294 going into sipsock_wait

        09:51:02 siproxd.c:320 back from sipsock_wait
        09:51:02 security.c:48 security_check_raw: size=567
        09:51:02 register.c:238 sip_register:
        09:51:02 sip_utils.c:772 looking for magic cookie [z9hG4bKde49a53666CE8D7D]
        09:51:02 sip_utils.c:786 existing branch -> branch hash [f943627343cb464fa1c256d671bb4461]
        09:51:02 sip_utils.c:586 adding VIA:SIP/2.0/UDP 70.166.35.44:5060;branch=z9hG4bKf943627343cb464fa1c256d671bb4461
        09:51:02 ERROR:sock.c:175 sendto() [204.14.39.36:5060 size=650] call failed: Operation not permitted
        09:51:02 siproxd.c:294 going into sipsock_wait

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • S
          sullrich
          last edited by

          My first guess is that it did not remove the prior packages correctly.  I would try to pkg_delete any remaining packages after uninstalling from the GUI and then reinstall the newer packages.

          Also do a pkg_info after uninstalling the package from the GUI and lets see if it is indeed not removing them correctly.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • X
            xibalba
            last edited by

            did a fresh install with 1.2-release and the siproxd 0.7.0 pkg (thanks for updating that so quickly). everything seems to be working smooth so far.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • First post
              Last post
            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.