asterisk users - Feb 2010 - sip.conf - sort order, does it matter

Does the sort order matter in sip.conf file?
I know sort order might effect:
allow=ulaw
allow=alaw

but does it matter where I place: insecure=invite ?

The reason I'm asking is that I've loaded almost two identical (sip.conf
and extension.conf) files on the same asterisk server and with one set
   insecure=invite is working correctly.
When I load the second set of dial plan (sip.conf and extension.conf)
insecure=invite is not taking effect.
I get:
"... username mismatch, have <4>, digest has <pstn-4444>
handle_request_invite: Failed to authenticate user "KMIEC J"

Someone have mentioned that sort order in sip.conf might effect the way it
works.

-- 
Joseph

17 feb 2010 kl. 19.12 skrev Joseph:
> Does the sort order matter in sip.conf file?
> I know sort order might effect:
> allow=ulaw
> allow=alaw
> 
> but does it matter where I place: insecure=invite ?
> 
> The reason I'm asking is that I've loaded almost two identical
(sip.conf and extension.conf) files on the same asterisk server and with one set
>   insecure=invite is working correctly.
> When I load the second set of dial plan (sip.conf and extension.conf)
insecure=invite is not taking effect.
> I get:
> "... username mismatch, have <4>, digest has <pstn-4444>
> handle_request_invite: Failed to authenticate user "KMIEC J"
> 
> Someone have mentioned that sort order in sip.conf might effect the way it
works.
No, where you place the insecure=invite in the device specification does not
matter.

/O

17 feb 2010 kl. 19.12 skrev Joseph:
> Does the sort order matter in sip.conf file?
> I know sort order might effect:
> allow=ulaw
> allow=alaw
> 
> but does it matter where I place: insecure=invite ?
> 
> The reason I'm asking is that I've loaded almost two identical
(sip.conf and extension.conf) files on the same asterisk server and with one set
>   insecure=invite is working correctly.
> When I load the second set of dial plan (sip.conf and extension.conf)
insecure=invite is not taking effect.
> I get:
> "... username mismatch, have <4>, digest has <pstn-4444>
> handle_request_invite: Failed to authenticate user "KMIEC J"
> 
You propably have a type=friend where the user part matches before you even hit
the peer part, where the insecure configuration parameter matches. There is a
confusion here on the From: username and the authentication username used, so
there is a challenge sent.

/O

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Olle E. Johansson <oej at edvina.net>
wrote:
> You propably have a type=friend where the user part matches before you even
hit the peer part, where the insecure configuration parameter matches. There is
a confusion here on the From: username and the authentication username used, so
there is a challenge sent.
Is it just me, or would it be nice if a clear, understandable and
unambiguous way to express codec desirata was invented? Is there a
future iteration of SIP that deals with it?

/r