28 Aug
2008
28 Aug
'08
3:50 p.m.
just a hint on this project if you are using nat...
make sure that your subscribe and notifies have a reply route set for them.
In this reply route, you need to invoke nat helper and fix_natted_contact or
your replies to subscribe and notifies will have a natted private contact
address. If this private address reaches a phone in a reply (especially
polycoms) then the phone will prefer the new location of the contact over
the explicit location detailed in your subscribe list. If this happens,
phones will appear to lose reg until the requests fail and the phone
reissues its subscribe/notify to the explixcit address it has configured for
the contact.
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 4:44 AM, Klaus Darilion <
klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:
Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth schrieb:
On 08/28/2008 08:55 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
wrote:
The SIP URIs in From header of the NOTIFY should not matter (except the
client is buggy).
Regarding the URI in the PIDF body actually I do not know.
regards
klaus
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)lists.kamailio.org
http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On 08/28/08 09:49, Alexander 'Leo'
Bergolth wrote:
This is UA to UA presence.
But I'm interested in both cases.
I'd like to start with UA to UA because this is easier to implement. I
am also considering switching to a presence-server once it works. I'd like to implement P2P presence and
extension monitoring for my SIP
network.
is this UA to UA presence notification or are you using presence server?