6 Jul
2005
6 Jul
'05
8:58 p.m.
Hi Lucas.
May I ask you which STUN server are you using?
TNX
Juan
-----Original Message-----
From: serusers-bounces(a)iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On
Behalf Of Lucas Aimaretto
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 12:44 PM
To: andres(a)telesip.net; 'Giovanni Balasso'
Cc: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Subject: RE: [Serusers] NAT considerations...
I have many linuxes around there, and many linksys routers too, and had no
problems with STUN at all. In fact, when I run my stun-client application
behind a linux-like OS, this is what I'm told:
Port restricted NAT detected - VoIP will work with STUN Preserves port
number Does not supports hairpin of media
Regards,
Lucas
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.9/42 - Release Date: 06/07/2005
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Why don't
people use stun?
Has it some major drawbacks I still haven't found? What are main
advantages of rtpproxy-mediaproxy solutions?
I'm really curious to know serusers opinions about this issue.
thank you all for your two cents ;)
STUN does not work if your NAT is Symmetric. For example all Linux
NATs or routers with Linux OS like the Linksys ones. Unless you have
full control on what type of NAT your customer will deploy, it will be
very hard to stick to an all STUN solution.