23 Apr
2010
23 Apr
'10
3:59 p.m.
2010/4/23 Jesus Rodriguez <jesusr(a)voztele.com>om>:
Great.
Thanks a lot.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc(a)aliax.net>
Hola Iñaki,
But the "problem" is that the SDP doesn't contain a=nortpproxy:yes" as
the B2BUA removed it. Then I don't need "-f" :)
But my question is, will be there media between both RtpProxies then?
Well, after reading "Allows creating chain of proxies" it seems that
it should be :)
Hi, I must deal with a B2BUA which keeps the
original SDP unchanged
except the fact that it removes the "a=nortpproxy:yes" line added by
RtpProxy.
The B2BUA intercommunicates two Kamailio, both forcing its own RtpProxy server.
I've not tested it again but expect there will be no RTP as each
RtpProxy will wait for RTP coming from the other. Am I right?
Of course I could force RtpProxy just in NAT cases and so, but I
prefer to force it always so the clients of each Kamailio can
configure QoS for the media addresses (different in each server). Is
there some workaround for it?
You can use "-f" with force_rtp_proxy() :
f - instructs nathelper to ignore marks inserted by another nathelper in transit to
indicate that the session is already goes through another proxy. Allows creating chain of
proxies. In the other
hand: is it possible two different Kamailio's to share
the same RtpProxy server? I've never tryied it. If it's valid, would
it solve the B2BUA issue? (I don't think so as there are still
different media sessions created by different kamailio instances).
Yes, you can share the same rtpproxy with different Kamailios.