Re: [Users] x-lite and nat_uac_test(16)

Can you provide a full trace of the complete X-Lite startup sequence from the host where X-Lite is running? Maybe there's some STUN stuff going on prior to the registration (don't know exactly how this works, but it'll show up in the trace).

Alexander Bergolth wrote: > On 05/18/2007 05:21 PM, Andreas Granig wrote: >> Alexander, >>> I've noticed that (at least on my boxes) x-lite uses a different >>> source-port for the sip-connection than the one that is announced in >>> the >>> Via-header. (See the example below.) >> Are you sure there isn't any NAT or ALG in between? By default, x-lite >> binds to local port 5060, but you've some non-standard ports in there. >> So my guess is either a non-standard port setting in x-lite and NAT, or >> a faulty ALG on the NAT device. >> >> Here's a trace using x-lite 2.0 r1105d (Linux): >> >> U 192.168.123.129:5060 -> <public IP>:5060 >> REGISTER sip:<some domain> SIP/2.0. >> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.123.129:5060;rport;branch=z9hG4<snip> > > I did some further tests using X-Lite for Windows with interesting > results: > > TCP enabled: > > - X-Lite binds to a source-port different from 5060 although 5060 is > available according to netstat. > > - the port that shows up in the Via-header is different from the > source-port that is used for the TCP-connection > > only UDP enabled on the server: > > - X-Lite binds to a source-port different from 5060 although 5060 is > available according to netstat. > > - the port that shows up in the Via-header is the correct source-port > > - if there is a TCP-SRV record in DNS, it tries TCP first, falls back to > UDP after 19 seconds but uses "Via: SIP/2.0/TCP" instead of "Via: > SIP/2.0/UDP" > > I'll file a bug-report, let's see what happens... > > Cheers, > --leo