3 Aug
2007
3 Aug
'07
12:31 p.m.
Hi Iñaki,
in the case of STUN the connection information is already written
with public ip, and could be that it is wrong detected (when it comes
to port). Therefore u need a way to rewrite this info with the right
IP as far as I understood (internal in this case, so the people behind
the same NAT should send media directly to internal ip) . Maybe I am
mistaken.
DanB
On 8/3/07, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc(a)in.ilimit.es> wrote:
El Friday 03 August 2007 11:15:57 Marc LEURENT
escribió:
Hello everybody,
To remind you, I'm trying to set a SIP architecture for NATTED SIP users
without using any rtp proxy (because of lack of ressource).
STUN is working very well between 2 users in 2 differents NATs.
But when they are behing the same NAT, they cannot reach the other.. In
the INVITE and 200Ok SDP fields, they have put their public address with
a port reserved with STUN: it's not working!
I think that it is because it's difficult for them to reach the public
IPaddress/port where they should send the RTP stream from inside the NAT.
So my idea was: Why not rewriting SDP fields to put their private
address when they are behind the same NAT
But I don't know how to rewrite the SDP fields for both users. (I have
the private address of both users in the location database)
In NAT cases I compare the source IP of the caller with the IP where the
called is:
NOTE:
modparam("usrloc", "nat_bflag", 6)
if (nat_uac_test("19")) {
...
setbflag(6); # NAT flag general
if (method!="REGISTER") {
fix_nated_contact();
setbflag(5); # NAT flag just for the caller
...
if (isbflagset(5)) { # Caller is behind NAT
if ( $dd == $si ) {
xlog("L_INFO", "Both users behind same NAT, so we dont use
RtpProxy\n");
resetbflag(6); # Unset NAT flag general.
}
}
I think this is better choice than using RtpProxy and setting private IP's in
SDP and Contact header.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
ibc(a)in.ilimit.es
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users