9 Nov
2009
9 Nov
'09
8:48 p.m.
Klaus Darilion writes:
that is what i meant.
i first
thought to add the $du test, but looks like the via test makes
it unnecessary. however, loose_route() may be key to solving the reply
problem: if loose_route() sets $du, it means that next hop is another
proxy. then it is possible to set TO_PROXY flag and test it
onreply_route. right?
yes, but only in in-dialog requests. In my setups currently I do the NAT decision in first
request processing
and store the result in a RR-cookie. in-dialog NAT handling is purely
done on RR-cookie. RR-cookie defines if NAT handling is done for caller,
callee or both.
Regarding NAT-detection my decision algorithm is simple and pragmatic:
if request comes from a local account (is_from_local()), then the caller
will be marked for NAT traversal (regardless if behind NAT or not.
Further, target will be analysed and calls to local users will be
NAT-handled.
klaus, you keep on mentioning nat. these functions have nothing to do
with nat detection.
-- juha