Re: Weird problem: bind to carrier fails, kannel stops responding - but bind is still listed as 'online'
"Alexander Malysh" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.mobile.kannel.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, please set log-level = 0 in your core group and post debug log so we can see what happened. Am 29.01.2007, 08:22 Uhr, schrieb Giulio Harding <[email protected]>: > This is a moderately urgent problem, since it's recently cropped up on a > bind to carrier that carries a reasonable amount of traffic, and after > some investigation, we have NO idea what's going wrong. This has > happened 3 or 4 times over the past month - the bind had been performing > flawlessly up until this point. In previous occurrences of this problem, > the problem has gone away after some time (e.g. a few hours, or a day or > two), but we're worried the problem will reappear just when we're due to > handle large peaks in traffic. (We've been lucky so far) > > The problem is as follows: at some point, we noticed the bind had one MT > in the store, and no MOs were arriving on that bind. However, the bind > was still listed as 'online'. We tried restarting Kannel, and that bind > would come up again, and the queued MT would be sent to the destination > handset, but wouldn't leave the queue, and wouldn't be marked as sent by > Kannel. Again, no MOs would arrive on that bind, even though it seemed > to be up. Sometimes, one or two MOs might arrive, and one or two MTs > might be successfully sent, but then that bind would seize up again, > with an MT in the store, and no further MOs or MTs would be > > A packet capture during a Kannel restart then shutdown showed that after > the initial successful bind, there would be one or two successful > submit_sms, but then nothing - no enquire_links, no responses to > deliver_sms sent by the SMSC, etc. - just occasional TCP keep-alives. > Each time Kannel is restarted, the same queued messages would be > successfully submitted, but not removed from the queue. > > Here's a sample packet capture summary: > > No. Time Source Destination Protocol > Info > 26 15.747608 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP 35085 > copysnap [SYN] Seq=0 Len=0 MSS=1360 TSV=2576408299 > TSER=0 WS=2 > 30 15.788987 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > TCP copysnap > 35085 [SYN, ACK] Seq=0 Ack=1 Win=61440 Len=0 > MSS=1436 WS=0 > 31 15.788998 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=1 Ack=1 Win=5440 Len=0 > 32 15.789142 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > SMPP SMPP Bind_transceiver > 42 15.830586 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > SMPP SMPP Bind_transceiver - resp: "Ok" > 43 15.830595 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=45 Ack=28 Win=5440 Len=0 > 44 15.831265 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > SMPP SMPP Submit_sm > 51 15.939520 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > TCP copysnap > 35085 [ACK] Seq=28 Ack=175 Win=61266 Len=0 > 54 16.016723 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > SMPP SMPP Submit_sm - resp: "Ok" > 55 16.056163 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=175 Ack=73 Win=5440 Len=0 > 60 20.344091 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > SMPP SMPP Deliver_sm > 61 20.344105 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=175 Ack=145 Win=5440 Len=0 > 80 80.089288 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > TCP [TCP Keep-Alive] copysnap > 35085 [ACK] Seq=144 Ack=174 > Win=32768 Len=1 > 81 80.089299 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP [TCP Keep-Alive ACK] 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=175 Ack=145 > Win=5440 Len=0 > 107 139.857528 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > TCP [TCP Keep-Alive] copysnap > 35085 [ACK] Seq=144 Ack=174 > Win=32768 Len=1 > 108 139.857543 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP [TCP Keep-Alive ACK] 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=175 Ack=145 > Win=5440 Len=0 > 109 153.240014 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > SMPP SMPP Deliver_sm > 110 153.240029 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=175 Ack=315 Win=6512 Len=0 > 129 212.573429 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > TCP [TCP Keep-Alive] copysnap > 35085 [ACK] Seq=314 Ack=174 > Win=32768 Len=1 > 130 212.573442 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP [TCP Keep-Alive ACK] 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=175 Ack=315 > Win=6512 Len=0 > 156 272.340457 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > TCP [TCP Keep-Alive] copysnap > 35085 [ACK] Seq=314 Ack=174 > Win=32768 Len=1 > 157 272.340467 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP [TCP Keep-Alive ACK] 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=175 Ack=315 > Win=6512 Len=0 > 167 314.727055 xxx.xx.xx.xx 10.110.123.31 > SMPP SMPP Deliver_sm > 168 314.727069 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP 35085 > copysnap [ACK] Seq=175 Ack=383 Win=6512 Len=0 > 178 337.665939 10.110.123.31 xxx.xx.xx.xx > TCP 35085 > copysnap [RST, ACK] Seq=175 Ack=383 Win=6512 Len=0 > > You can see the successful transciever bind (packet #'s 32, 42), the > successful submit_sm (44, 54), the ignored deliver_sm (60, and again at > 109 and 167), all the TCP keep-alives, no enquire-links, and a final RST > as kannel is restarted (no unbind?) > > The TCP stream immediately after the restart, for the same bind is > pretty much identical. Bind_transciever, submit_sm, then nothing. > > The message in the queue is: > > SMS ID Type Time Sender Receiver SMSC ID BOX ID UDH Message > ---- > aa37aeef-1db0-494b-bfdc-7f574f5a9263 MT-REPLY 2007-01-29 16:37:11 > 19xxxxxx 614xxxxxxxx xxxx <79 character text message that is being > sent fine across all other binds, and was sent fine through this bind > before the problem> > > There are no messages in the bearer.log related to the problem bind. > > > So: > > Firstly, are there any debug options or advanced logging I can turn on > to try and find out what Kannel is doing with this bind? Secondly, does > anyone have any ideas what the issue might be? > > We're running Kannel version `cvs-20060727' - Build `Sep 21 2006 > 14:42:06', compiler `3.4.6 20060404 (Red Hat 3.4.6-3)'. System Linux, > release 2.6.9-42.0.2.ELsmp, version #1 SMP Wed Aug 23 13:38:27 BST 2006, > machine x86_64. Hostname smsgw2.appgw.mnetcorporation.com, IP > 10.110.123.31. Libxml version 2.6.16. Using native malloc. > > We haven't yet had a chance to move to 1.4.1 (our test/build servers are > being serviced) but from keeping an eye on the dev mailing list, I don't > think we've missed any critical patches...? In any case, since this CVS > build, we've had no problems until now. > > Any assistance would be greatly appreciated! > > -- > Giulio Harding > Systems Administrator > > m.Net Corporation > Level 2, 16 Leigh Street > Adelaide SA 5000, Australia > > Tel: +61 8 8210 2041 > Fax: +61 8 8211 9620 > Mobile: 0432 876 733 > MSN: [email protected] > > http://www.mnetcorporation.com > > > > > > -- Thanks, Alex