3 Dec
2003
3 Dec
'03
12:31 a.m.
Jiri Kuthan wrote:
At 10:48 PM 12/2/2003, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
I didn't involve tofu :-)
Jiri Kuthan wrote:
I'm not good in agronomy so I can't compete in statements about fruits,
apples and other healthy food. at best both, STUN does not help with all kinds of
NATs. Use STUN
if you can, RTP proxy otherwise. -jiri
You can't choose between the fruit basket and an apple...
However as for NATs, the strategy "use STUN by default, rtp relay as last
resort"
works pretty well. STUN actually does the magic to let your calls through
for many NATs.
Your right, but for documentation I should say "use STUN
discovery to make the
client behave correct for your network. If it doesn't work out, use a RTP
relay".
Or have I missed something in regards to STUN? STUN, TURN, COMEDIA - I wish
we didn't have NAT's... IPv6 - a glory new world.
/O ;-)
-jiri
--
*** Olle E. Johansson, oej(a)edvina.net
Mobile +46 70 593 68 51, Edvina AB, http://www.edvina.net
Runbovägen 10, 192 48 Sollentuna, Sweden
Phone: +46 8 594 78 810, Fax: +46 8 594 78 820
STUN checks the NAT situation from a client point
of view. STUN does not
do magic to let your calls through, it gives the UA an idea on how the
world looks and then the UA makes the choice on how to get traffic going
or give up and eat up all the fruits in the basket.
If you have problems with your NAT, the RTP proxy might be part of the solution to
get calls going in combination with SER module Nathelper. The whole idea is
to take care of the media stream when the two SIP clients can't handle the
media stream across the NAT's. Yes, it shouldn't be necessary.
Other solutions involve symmetric RTP, see
http://www.voip-info.org/wiki-RTP+Symmetric
More info on STUN:
http://www.voip-info.org/tiki-index.php?page=Stun
Vovida.org have an Open Source STUN server.
Pointer here:
http://www.voip-info.org/tiki-index.php?page=Open%20Source%20Voip%20software
Disclaimer: This is a messy area. I could be all wrong... :-)
/Olle
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/