23 Jul
2005
23 Jul
'05
11 p.m.
I'm trying to use STUN for NAT traversal for all clients not using 1 to 1
NATing, and mediaproxy for the rare few who does.But it seems that all
traffic is proxied anyway, dont really understand why. I do call the
routeblock for mediaproxy before relaying the call, but since STUN is used
it should not detect that NAT is in place. Or am I missing some logic?
Any Idea on how to accomplish this?
Kind regards
Roger - Getting one step closer to a really god service everyday ;)
1 Aug
1 Aug
11:50 a.m.
Unless the NAT is a symmetric NAT. Look at the incoming REGISTER messages and how you
detect NAT presence. There must be something in the message (or your code, or your STUN)
that sets the flag for that location. Use serctl ul show to see whether the flag is set.
g-)
---- Original Message ----
From: Roger Lewau
To: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 10:00 PM
Subject: [Serusers] STUN for NAT traversal...
I'm trying to use STUN for NAT traversal for all
clients not using 1
to 1 NATing, and mediaproxy for the rare few who does.But it seems
that all traffic is proxied anyway, dont really understand why. I do
call the routeblock for mediaproxy before relaying the call, but
since STUN is used it should not detect that NAT is in place. Or am I
missing some logic?
Any Idea on how to accomplish this?
Kind regards
Roger - Getting one step closer to a really god service everyday ;)
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
7053
days inactive
7062
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Greger V. Teigre -
Roger Lewau