3 May
2005
3 May
'05
12:05 p.m.
Juha Heinanen wrote:
Yes, and also (port-)restricted cone NAT won't work...
UPnP isn't widespread enough and cascading NAT won't work too (just want
to be shure to take into account all possibilities ;o) )
Ok, so the conclusion is to use a clustered solution with one public IP
and some kind of heartbeat.
Well, thanks for the insights anyway.
Andy
If so, it
theoretically should work with transparent NAT handling on two
SERs too, if both SERs know the external IP/port of UAC-1.
yes, but symmetric nat would not forward packets to uac from the ip
address of the other ser even if it sends them to the external ip/port
of the uac.