Jaime,
On 24-03 13:20, jaime.gill(a)orange.co.uk wrote:
Hello Jiri,
Of course, I meant the non-paranoic meaning, that is forcing the subsequent
requests to go through the proxy.
The question is related to the FCP module I'm trying to complete. In order to
close the previously opened ports, the module needs to see BYE and CANCEL
messages. When adding record-routing header from a natted proxy, this address
must be changed to a public one whenever the message is for the public Internet.
Is my understanding correct?
Yes, your understanding is correct, but we will solve the problem in a
different way. Instead of modifying record-route headers, it is
possible to insert two of them, one with internal IP address and the
other with public IP address.
Suppose that callee is in the public internet and caller in private
network. The caller sends an INVITE, the INVITE will reach your proxy
and it will insert rr with private IP address and after that another rr with
public IP address of your NAT.
When the caller wants to send a BYE, it will use the rr with public IP
of your NAT box. Your proxy will detect that there are 2 route headers and
remove both of them.
Callee sending BYE will reverse the order of all record-route header
fields and therefore it will use record-route with private IP address -
the message will hit your proxy directly. Again, the proxy detects
presence of 2 route fields and will remove both of them.
My other concern with Record Routing is whether this
translation for the request
involves translating the RR field back to the one of the natted proxy, when the
response hits the proxy.
Don't worry about Record-Routes, I am currently working on the trick
described above so you will get this feature for free with the new
release.
Jan.