29 May
2005
29 May
'05
11:29 a.m.
Running rtpproxy on a NATed box is a problem (you need a patch I posted a
while back to announce the correct public IP). Running all daemons on the
same server with a public IP is NOT a problem.
g-)
harry gaillac wrote:
Hello,
SER+nathelper+rtpproxy run on the same box that nat.
Is it a problem ?
Harry
--- "Greger V. Teigre" <greger(a)teigre.com> a écrit :
That's strange. We are using some Polycom 300
and
they work ok. No STUN
support and sometimes a very erratic registration
pattern, but except from
that, they seem to perform ok. They interoperate
with sipuras,
grandstreams, sjphone, cisco gw, xlite, etc.
g-)
Juha Heinanen wrote:
_____________________________________________________________________________
Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 1 Go d'espace de stockage pour vos
mails, photos et vidéos ! Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur
http://fr.mail.yahoo.com harry,
we tried polycom video phones a month or so ago
and their sip
implementation was worst i had seen so far. the
phones didn't support
digest authentication and we were also hit the
problem you mentioned
with domain in request-uri. i suggest to junk
those phones before
their sip implementation is closer to rfc3261.
-- juha
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers