20 Dec
2004
20 Dec
'04
8:10 a.m.
Hello
I have one phone (phone1) in one network, the other (phone2) in public
network. both can call the other side; phone1 can be heard by phone2, phone2
can't be heard. I don't have NAT set on both end, but I use rtpproxy on SER.
Is NAT still necessary to be set on both phones?
Thank you!
steven
20 Dec
20 Dec
9:25 a.m.
New subject: [Serusers] sip phones in different private networks have onewayaudio
If you use rtpproxy, you don't need to configure stun/nat on any UAs. I
assume that everything is ok if phone1 calls phone2? If no, you have a
problem with on_reply processing as phone2 will not be registered as behind
NAT and the initial INVITE will not force rtp_proxy. If yes, but calling
phone1 from phone2 is the problem, you probably have something wrong in the
processing of either REGISTER (phone1 does not have the NAT flag set when
you run serctl ul show) or in processing of INVITEs (the INVITE does not get
a: IN rtpproxy_ip_address in the SDP payload and nortpproxy is not added at
the end of the payload).
Hope this helps,
g-)
Steven Wang wrote:
Hello
I have one phone (phone1) in one network, the other (phone2) in public
network. both can call the other side; phone1 can be heard by phone2,
phone2 can't be heard. I don't have NAT set on both end, but I use
rtpproxy on SER. Is NAT still necessary to be set on both phones?
Thank you!
steven
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
7286
days inactive
7286
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Greger V. Teigre -
Steven Wang