If you are interested, I have fixed my problem.

In fact, it seems to be impossible to use force_rtp_proxy() with

rewritehostport("xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060"); forward(uri:host, uri:port);

The solution I found is to use

rewritehostport("xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060"); route(1);

with the default route(1) instead of forward().

route[1] { # !! Nathelper if (uri=~"[@:](192.168.|10.|172.(1[6-9]|2[0-9]|3[0-1]).)" && !search("^Route:")){ sl_send_reply("479", "We don't forward to private IP addresses"); return; };

# if client or server know to be behind a NAT, enable relay if (isflagset(6)){ force_rtp_proxy(); };

# NAT processing of replies; apply to all transactions (for example, # re-INVITEs from public to private UA are hard to identify as # NATed at the moment of request processing); look at replies t_on_reply("1");

# send it out now; use stateful forwarding as it works reliably # even for UDP2TCP if (!t_relay()) { sl_reply_error(); }; }

-----Message d'origine----- De : serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] De la part de prevot@enseirb.fr Envoyé : vendredi 21 avril 2006 15:50 À : serusers@lists.iptel.org Objet : [Serusers] force_rtp_proxy() in some cases only

Hi all,

I’d like to use RTP relay as less as possible and I know that only a few users of my network need it. When those clients make a INVITE, I use force_rtp_proxy().

But how can I know if an OK received by OpenSER needs force_rtp_proxy() or not? Is it a way to check for OK if a flag has been set during INVITE?

Thanks a lot, Paul

---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

_______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers