On 07/07/2009 07:09 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2009/7/7 Henning Westerholt henning.westerholt@1und1.de:
if i remember correctly one of the original ideas behind the nat-traversal module was to consolidate the helper functionality needed to support nat traversal into one module, instead of having two more or less redundant implementations in nathelper and mediaproxy modules. Not sure how the current state of integration is at the moment.. I also think that a clear separation of efforts would be a good thing.
If i understand the module docs correctly then nat_traversal seems to support better and/ or more efficient nat keep alive, among others. Its not restricted to only ping users from location table, for example.
I use nat-traversal module and it's MUCH MUCH more powerful than nathelper, for sure.
I do not agree at all with this, when comes to flexibility. nat_traversal main problem is the relying on dialog module, which adds lot of overhead to a proxy.
For presence, like for registration, the keepalive should be done by the endpoint (registrar, presence server), otherwise you get into scalability issues.
Cheers, Daniel
It allows NAT keepalive for non registered users when they are in a INVITE or SUBSCRIBE dialog.
Alex, please, take a look to nat-traversal full documentation.