Hi, I've discovered en error in my conf when there is an user "B" registered from two devices: - device-B1 behind NAT with NO-STUN. - device-B2 with public IP. If "A" from public IP calls to "B" then the blag(6) (NAT) should be tested inside a "branch_route", because if not, then it could return TRUE or FALSE depending on which device (device-B1 or device-B2) appears first in "location" table. So, if I use: ----------------------------------------------------------------- # RTP-proxy Section route[8] { if (isbflagset(6)) { force_rtp_proxy(); } } ----------------------------------------------------------------- then RtpProxy will be enabled or not enabled for **ALL** the branchs (just device-B1 needs RtpProxy). But the pain here is that it's possible to not enable RtpProxy in a branch who needs it. So I think the solution (it seems to work i nmy testing) is to handle this in "branch_route": ----------------------------------------------------------------- # RTP-proxy Section route[8] { t_on_branch("8"); } branch_route[8] { if (isbflagset(6)) { force_rtp_proxy(); } } ----------------------------------------------------------------- I would like to confirm this with you, since I've never seen in any conf a "branch_route" to handle NAT bflag and RtpProxy. Is my conclusion correct? should I keep in mind other things related to this? Thanks a lot. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo ibc(a)in.ilimit.es