Hi Andreas,
it should depend also by how well the sip ua implements the RFC. In
normal cases, I mark the natted requests with ";nat=yes" when record
routing, and after I I will treat all the packets containing "nat=yes"
like generated from behind nat and force rtp_proxy in their case.
Some sample config:
# --------------------------------------
# NAT
# --------------------------------------
if (nat_uac_test("7") || search("^Route:.*;nat=yes")) {
force_rport();
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
setbflag(6);
} else {
setflag(7);
fix_nated_contact();
if (is_method("INVITE")){
fix_nated_sdp("1");
};
};
};
# --------------------------------------
# Record Routing
# --------------------------------------
if (method=="INVITE" && isflagset(7)) {
record_route_preset("$var(listen_ip);nat=yes");
} else if (method!="REGISTER") {
record_route();
};
if (isbflagset(6) || isflagset(7)) {
setbflag(10);
force_rtp_proxy();
}
Hope that helps.
Cheers,
DanB
On 9/27/07, Andreas Sikkema <andreas.sikkema(a)bbeyond.nl> wrote:
Hi,
2) I suspect that you have not treated properly
reinvites in loose
routing block. Some traces and configuration samples could permit us
helping you more.
What is the correct way of handling re-invites in a loose routing
block? So far I have disabled al reinvites because I also had
problems in this area...
--
Andreas Sikkema
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users