27 Sep
2007
27 Sep
'07
2:42 p.m.
Hi, I've discovered en error in my conf when there is an user "B" registered
from two devices:
- device-B1 behind NAT with NO-STUN.
- device-B2 with public IP.
If "A" from public IP calls to "B" then the blag(6) (NAT) should be
tested
inside a "branch_route", because if not, then it could return TRUE or FALSE
depending on which device (device-B1 or device-B2) appears first
in "location" table.
So, if I use:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
# RTP-proxy Section
route[8] {
if (isbflagset(6)) {
force_rtp_proxy();
}
}
-----------------------------------------------------------------
then RtpProxy will be enabled or not enabled for **ALL** the branchs (just
device-B1 needs RtpProxy). But the pain here is that it's possible to not
enable RtpProxy in a branch who needs it.
So I think the solution (it seems to work i nmy testing) is to handle this
in "branch_route":
-----------------------------------------------------------------
# RTP-proxy Section
route[8] {
t_on_branch("8");
}
branch_route[8] {
if (isbflagset(6)) {
force_rtp_proxy();
}
}
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to confirm this with you, since I've never seen in any conf
a "branch_route" to handle NAT bflag and RtpProxy. Is my conclusion correct?
should I keep in mind other things related to this?
Thanks a lot.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
ibc(a)in.ilimit.es