New subject: Kamailio / rtpproxy behaviour on dual-homed box

16 Aug 2013

On 16 August 2013 16:31, Alex Balashov &lt;abalashov(a)evaristesys.com&gt; wrote:

...
  I think this thread may help you:

    http://lists.sip-router.org/**pipermail/sr-users/2010-**

October/065669.html<http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/2010-…

 Hi Alex,

Thanks for the pointer!

I see that the kamailio.cfg that comes with 4.0.3 handles rtpproxy via the
new rtpproxy_manage call:

# RTPProxy control
route[NATMANAGE] {
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
        if (is_request()) {
                if(has_totag()) {
                        if(check_route_param("nat=yes")) {
                                setbflag(FLB_NATB);
                        }
                }
        }
        if (!(isflagset(FLT_NATS) || isbflagset(FLB_NATB)))
                return;

        rtpproxy_manage("co");   #
<---------------------------------------------------

        if (is_request()) {
                if (!has_totag()) {
                        if(t_is_branch_route()) {
                                add_rr_param(";nat=yes");
                        }
                }
        }
        if (is_reply()) {
                if(isbflagset(FLB_NATB)) {
                        add_contact_alias();
                }
        }
#!endif
        return;
}

this route block is called from a few places.

Seems like I will need to improve this to take account of the direction of
the message and use "ie" or "ei" as appropriate?

Thanks,
Steve

Re: [SR-Users] Kamailio / rtpproxy behaviour on dual-homed box