Can I replace nathelper.c from ser-0.8.11 (release) with the latest from dev and recompile? I tried that and recompiled just nathelper.so. What happens now is that for fix_nated_sdp or force_rtp_proxy I get 'ERROR: extract_mediaip: no `c=' in SDP'. What is happening is that in each of those functions it calls extract_mediaip twice. The first time is OK. The 2nd it gives this error. Then when it sends out the request, it has the correct IP AND the proxy IP (e.g. 1.2.3.44.3.2.1)
Does it need the full latest CVS to work? I get a mysql error with that.
Thanks in advance.
Dovid
I have changed my config too much, too often. I may have had fix_nated_sdp AND force_rtp_proxy at the same time (so it put in both addresses, received and proxy/rtpproxy). You may want to keep an eye out for that - before changing it, see if it was changed already and complain.
I am still getting the error message though. (debug=3.) From the code it looks like it may not really be an 'error' the 2nd pass through extract_mediaip.
Thanks for your contribution and your help.
Dovid
-----Original Message----- From: Maxim Sobolev [mailto:sobomax@portaone.com] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:58 AM To: Dovid Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: [Serusers] nathelper
Very strange, I'm using latest cvs version of nathelper with 0.8.11 release just fine.
-Maxim
Dovid wrote:
Can I replace nathelper.c from ser-0.8.11 (release) with the latest from
dev
and recompile? I tried that and recompiled just nathelper.so. What happens now is that for fix_nated_sdp or force_rtp_proxy I get
'ERROR:
extract_mediaip: no `c=' in SDP'. What is happening is that in each of
those
functions it calls extract_mediaip twice. The first time is OK. The 2nd it gives this error. Then when it sends out the request, it has the correct
IP
It is constantly changing. I am working in a development environment. I am using nathelper separately on a different server with a few people testing it. That version is before the 0.8.11 release and is not using rtp_proxy.
If you set debug=3, do you see those messages?
At some point in testing I was not using a reply_route. It looks like the 100 and 180 are handled OK because (of both) #1, they are handled by tm, and #2 they do not have Contact or SDP anyway so there is nothing to fix. The '200 OK' though was hitting loose_route. I had add_rport(); and fix_nated_contact(); before loose_route and/or after loose_route before t_relay. When it sent it out, it was not fixed though. In this case it was a call from the PSTN, which the gateway is not behind nat, to a phone behind nat. So the INVITE did not need fixing, but the replies did. Is there something in the code that blocked it from fixing? (If this were in a reply_route, it would have fixed it. Is it checking?) With reply_route it works OK, and my config has changed since then anyway so it is sort of irrelevant.
Dovid
-----Original Message----- From: Maxim Sobolev [mailto:sobomax@portaone.com] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 6:54 PM To: Dovid Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: [Serusers] nathelper
Can I have a look at your config?
-Maxim
Dovid wrote:
I have changed my config too much, too often. I may have had fix_nated_sdp AND force_rtp_proxy at the same time (so it put in both addresses,
received
-
Dovid -
Maxim Sobolev