Hi Juha,
sorry for the late answer. I've discussed this with the SEMS guys (we were discussing about IPv4/IPv6 interworking), who discussed this with Alfred E. Heggestad. We did agree, that SDP would probably never contain both IPv4 or IPv6 addresses. RFC 6157 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6157, "IPv6 Transition in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)") also recommends using ICE for SIP-IPv4/IPv6 dual-stack. If we follow this RFC and typical UA's, we will always have "either/or" rather than "and". However, i've never seen any dual-stack SIP-Endpoints so far..
Kind regards, Carsten
2012/11/2 Juha Heinanen jh@tutpro.com:
admin@sip-router.org writes:
New Option: "x" for automatic bridging between IPv4 and IPv6. Based on the following assumption: "i" is the IPv4 interface and "e" is the IPv6 interface on the RTPProxy (tested with both RTPProxy and Sipwise's ngcp-mediaproxy-ng).
Mechanism is as follows:
- IP in SDP is IPv4: Do bridging "ie"
- IP in SDP is IPv6: Do bridging "ei"
i don't know how this would help. proxy gets invite that includes ipv4 or ipv6 address in sdp and $rd is domain name. what should proxy config do?
in such situations perhaps rtpproxy should ADD its own address of different protocol in sdp and then when reply comes, un-arm rtpproxy if reply included address of original protocol.
i don't know if legacy UAs can deal with two ip addresses in sdp. if not, this whole bridging stuff is wasted effort.
-- juha
sr-dev mailing list sr-dev@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev