8 Jul
2009
8 Jul
'09
11:55 a.m.
Iñaki Baz Castillo schrieb:
2009/7/8 Klaus Darilion
<klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at>at>:
I don't understand this. PATH is required when a registration is done
through an outbound proxy, so the registrar routes request for that
AoR using also through the outbound proxy (the RURI is the Contact of
the REGISTER but the request is sent to the OBP.
E.g.: client <--->OBP<---->Registrar
If the Registrar does the NAT traversal, the NAT traversal mechanism
must take into account the PATH, that means either:
- send OPTION requests to the client using a pre loaded route via the OBP
- send OPTION requests or emtpy CRLF packets with spoofed source IP (the
IP of the OBP)
If the OBP does the NAT traversal, the NAT traversal mechanism need not
take care about PATH because there is no SIP proxy between the client
and the OBP.
regards
klaus
From
what seems here, definitely does not deal with PATH extension.
I think the concept
of nat_traversal correctly is focused on using outbound
proxies - e.g. you have several outbound proxies (multiple SRV or A records)
which relay the signaling to the core proxies (registrars, presence servers
...).
In such a setup there is no need for PATH support as the nat_traversal will
be done on the outbound proxy.