Hi!!
Right now I have SER based voip system but inside the local network. I would like to enable the external internet connection. Is it possible to realize the NAT handling but with SER-RTPProxy or SER-MediaProxy not with the public IP so still in the local net but with the strict forwarding rules on the router. where router ofcaurse has the public IP So that for instance having SER and media proxy inside local network but with whole SIP traffic routed to SER and RTP to media proxy??
Is one of the above methods more recommened at the moment with ser2??
Thank you in advance
Best Tomasz
If you forward like this: Public IP ---> Private IP
You should forward port 5060 + the UDP range used in rtpproxy/mediaproxy. Use advertised_address directive in addition to listen. The standard getting started NAT configs assumes that you have no local user agents, and just do far-end NAT traversal. g-)
TZieleniewski wrote:
Hi!!
Right now I have SER based voip system but inside the local network. I would like to enable the external internet connection. Is it possible to realize the NAT handling but with SER-RTPProxy or SER-MediaProxy not with the public IP so still in the local net but with the strict forwarding rules on the router. where router ofcaurse has the public IP So that for instance having SER and media proxy inside local network but with whole SIP traffic routed to SER and RTP to media proxy??
Is one of the above methods more recommened at the moment with ser2??
Thank you in advance
Best Tomasz _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Thank you for your answer!
Could you give me some more hints how to enable local user agent together with far-end NAT working together. One thing I should do is probalby to record route all messages so that the whole signalling goes through SER which knows the local IP adresses of local UA and those of the NAT'ed ones.
I have an cisco router which has an SIP handling support, so perhaps it will be enought just to enable nathelper pinging to sustain the NAT bindings with nated UAs and make strict port forwarding only to SER port 5060 and rest (fixing Contact and SDP) will be done by the router. Do You think that this might work.
Cheers Tomasz
Greger V. Teigre napisał(a):
If you forward like this: Public IP ---> Private IP
You should forward port 5060 + the UDP range used in rtpproxy/mediaproxy. Use advertised_address directive in addition to listen. The standard getting started NAT configs assumes that you have no local user agents, and just do far-end NAT traversal. g-)
TZieleniewski wrote:
Hi!!
Right now I have SER based voip system but inside the local network. I would like to enable the external internet connection. Is it possible to realize the NAT handling but with SER-RTPProxy or SER-MediaProxy not with the public IP so still in the local net but with the strict forwarding rules on the router. where router ofcaurse has the public IP So that for instance having SER and media proxy inside local network but with whole SIP traffic routed to SER and RTP to media proxy??
Is one of the above methods more recommened at the moment with ser2??
Thank you in advance
Best Tomasz _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Incidentally, there are two sets of logs on a Solaris box you might try. /var/log/syslog and /var/adm/messages
N.
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 09:26:09 +0100, Greger V. Teigre wrote
If you forward like this: Public IP ---> Private IP
You should forward port 5060 + the UDP range used in rtpproxy/mediaproxy. Use advertised_address directive in addition to listen. The standard getting started NAT configs assumes that you have no local user agents, and just do far-end NAT traversal. g-)
TZieleniewski wrote:
Hi!!
Right now I have SER based voip system but inside the local network. I would like to enable the external internet connection. Is it possible to realize the NAT handling but with SER-RTPProxy or SER-MediaProxy not with the public IP so still in the local net but with the strict forwarding rules on the router. where router ofcaurse has the public IP So that for instance having SER and media proxy inside local network but with whole SIP traffic routed to SER and RTP to media proxy??
Is one of the above methods more recommened at the moment with ser2??
Thank you in advance
Best Tomasz _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-
Greger V. Teigre -
sip -
TZieleniewski