Morten Tryfoss

Here you go! ``` 2024-01-17 16:28:14 +0100 : 192.168.75.141:60278 -> 192.168.23.184:443 INVITE sip:[email protected] SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/WSS e2ecvh8aqqb7.invalid;branch=z9hG4bK3017171 Max-Forwards: 69 To: From: ;tag=bhkk93kg21 Call-ID: 5hpl8bbtoq2hhhfgcn2k CSeq: 3488 INVITE Authorization: Digest algorithm=MD5,...

You're correct. I'm not specifying the contact directly. Afaik, I wasn't aware that that was an option. It seems like some other people also had the same struggle, so would...

I tested using contact_uri too with the original non-lowercased value, and it seems to end with the same result.

The user-part of To and From is in lower case, while username in Authorization header is like it should be. ``` REGISTER sip:domain.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/WSS tkb9vrejfuua.invalid;branch=z9hG4bK9724461 Max-Forwards: 69 To:...

I originally included the signalling with my client-side workaround in place, so it registers with all-lower. Edited the post to what I can see after altering behaviour in both ends....

This should be before the client workaround, and with default setting in Kamailio. ``` REGISTER sip:domain.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/WSS q5q96qlrkps3.invalid;branch=z9hG4bK1767564 Max-Forwards: 69 To: From: ;tag=de0133hugt Call-ID: igh7bgvafcobtbp26jsgs9 CSeq: 2 REGISTER...

Seems like JsSIP is somehow falling back to matching this against the configured value (settings), and not what it use for the INVITE?

Sorry, my bad. It's been so much back and forth here :) That was my previous presumption since I didn't notice it was actually the REGISTER-response causing it to use...

At first we only used: ``` uri: '[email protected]', authorization_user: '1705588985:[email protected]', ``` but then we also tried specifying contact_uri explicitely: `contact_uri: 'sip:[email protected]',` Same effect.

I would absolutely say it's a non-optimal behaviour/bug in the way Kamailio works without modified settings. Regardless of that, wouldn't it be a good idea to handle this in JsSIP...