Re: [SR-Users] RTPProxy and bridging IPv4/IPv6 with parallel forking

Hey there Daniel, Many thanks for so fast reply! I will test the scenario recommended in our labs and come back to you asap. The only thing which is still not clear to me is how to "store" the used rtp set, so I can re-use it with INVITEs. The thing which I have experienced is that on INVITE it is easy to spot the right configuration since I know the address family of both originator(af param) and destination(based on location), however on re-invite it will help to have the setup loaded from somewhere. My idea was route parameters, but impossible to set them in branches right now. Another option will be to decide based on origination/termination address family, but the termination one is right now available only in onsend routes where the rtpproxy functions are not in.

Ta, DanB On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > On 4/13/11 2:10 PM, Dan-Cristian Bogos wrote: >> Hey Guys, >> >> I was recently playing with gateway-ing IPv4-IPv6 and hit the >> following scenario: >> * AOR having contacts on both ipv4 and ipv6 and I wanted to do >> parallel forking. >> >> RTPProxy bridging works without any issue on a normal setup, however >> the problem shows up when needing to make calls toward rtpproxy to >> return both sides of bridge or only one (ee and ie combinations). Did >> any of you experiment with this scenario? >> >> EG: Call comes from ipv4, you want to send it to both ipv4 and ipv6. >> The branch route looks the right place to call rtpproxy but when >> calling unforce_rtp_proxy() on CANCEL, will rtpproxy be aware about >> which ports are we trying to cancel? One more issue would be with >> re-invite which must go out with the same ip of rtpproxy as original >> INVITE. Here we could store the bridge direction in some route >> parameter but unfortunately adding route params is not possible in >> branches. >> >> So what do u think? > interesting setup, indeed, but for sure to become very common in the near > future, personally I haven't got to this scenario yet :-) > > If does not work with one instance, I would use branch flags to mark the > branch doing ipv4 to ipv6 translation and engage a dedicated rtpproxy for > it. You can run two rtpproxy-es on the same server, in different sets: > http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules_k/rtpproxy.html#id3012059 > http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules_k/rtpproxy.html#id3009496 > > So the branch doing ipv4-ipv6 will have a flag set and use a particular > rtpproxy. On the 200ok, you can check the branch flag and engage again the > proper rtpproxy. > > Cheers, > Daniel > >> DanB >> >> PS: The "normal" setup of forking calls only ipv4 or only ipv6 works >> smooth, so support of ipv6 in kamailio or rtpproxy is not >> questionable. > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla > http://www.asipto.com > >