3 Dec
2004
3 Dec
'04
3:44 a.m.
Sorry. I was a bit quick there. Do you have any particular UAs/scenarios in
mind where this test will be more appropriate than the existing?
g-)
Richard wrote:
________________________________________
From: Greger V. Teigre [mailto:greger@teigre.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 9:00 PM
To: Richard; serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] nat test based on rfc1918 address in call-id
field
If I understand you correctly, you are talking
about test 16 found
in nathelper cvs. You may want to have a look at that test first.
You call nat_uac-test("19") to trigger the test.
g-)
eh. test 16 is different. it tests if the source port is different
from the port in Via.
The proposed test checks the private ip in Call-ID field.
>> Hi,
>> I am thinking about having more NAT test on a sip packet. Just want
>> to find out if it is useful.
>> I run into some situations that some 'smart' UAs try to detect its
>> external IP and put the external IP address into the sip packet.
>> Depending on the network and NAT firewall setup, it may or may not
>> set the right external IP and port in the packet. If it is not, but
>> pretends to be on the public internet, then there is most likely a
>> one-way voice or no voice issue. I'd like to be able to detect and
>> force it to use a nat proxy. By checking these packets, I found that
>> the only trace is the private IP address in the call-id header
>> field. It will be useful to check if a RFC1918 address is used in
>> the call-id. I understand that it is not a thorough test for NAT,
>> well, just like any other NAT test.
>> Can someone please comment if it is a good test?