[Serusers] How to force IPtel.org SIP proxy not to include RTP proxy in Media path (achive peer-to-peer flow)
4 Mar
2008
4 Mar
'08
2:12 p.m.
Hi,
I have 2 SIP based softphones (Xlite) registered on
IPtel.org SIP service and testing the calls among
them. These 2 softphones are behind different NAT and
IPtel.org SIP proxy is replacing the SDP connection
details in Call setup message (Invite and 200 OK) with
RTPproxy IP/ports. Hence, RTPproxy is relaying the
Voice media stream among them during the call.
Although, both the softphones are behind different NAT
address but these are not Symmetric NATs and hence RTP
can directly flow between these softphone using STUN
discovery.
Is it possible to disable the RTP proxy behaviour of
IPtel.org SER server for these 2 softphones through
some configuration changes or any special header
parameter in call setup message?
In User Management web interface of IPtel.org, there
is a option to specify the connectivity realm for a
user account under My Account -> Other tab.
The description of this field is "connectivity realm -
behind the same NAT or possibility to communicate
directly". I believe this field is playing some part
in NAT transversal mechanism of Iptel.org SER
implementation.
Can anyone please describe the significance of this
user account parameter? Can it be used to disable NAT
transversal of media stream for some individual
clients? I tried putting in same value of this field
for 2 user accounts but Iptel.org SIP server still
proxied media stream between these 2 user accounts
through its RTP proxy.
Thanks in advance.
Girish
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
5 Mar
5 Mar
9:22 a.m.
New subject: [Serusers] How to force IPtel.org SIP proxy not to include RTP proxy in Media path (achive peer-to-peer flow)
At 08:12 04/03/2008, girish kumar wrote:
Hi,
I have 2 SIP based softphones (Xlite) registered on
IPtel.org SIP service and testing the calls among
them. These 2 softphones are behind different NAT and
IPtel.org SIP proxy is replacing the SDP connection
details in Call setup message (Invite and 200 OK) with
RTPproxy IP/ports. Hence, RTPproxy is relaying the
Voice media stream among them during the call.
Although, both the softphones are behind different NAT
address but these are not Symmetric NATs and hence RTP
can directly flow between these softphone using STUN
discovery.
That's what I'm not sure about. If they were using STUN,
iptelorg:5060 should not have detected them as natted.
Any insight in this?
Is it possible to disable the RTP proxy behaviour of
IPtel.org SER server for these 2 softphones through
some configuration changes or any special header
parameter in call setup message?
In User Management web interface of IPtel.org, there
is a option to specify the connectivity realm for a
user account under My Account -> Other tab.
The description of this field is "connectivity realm -
behind the same NAT or possibility to communicate
directly". I believe this field is playing some part
in NAT transversal mechanism of Iptel.org SER
implementation.
I think too that was thought so, but I think it is
unused at the moment.
Can anyone please describe the significance of this
user account parameter? Can it be used to disable NAT
transversal of media stream for some individual
clients? I tried putting in same value of this field
for 2 user accounts but Iptel.org SIP server still
proxied media stream between these 2 user accounts
through its RTP proxy.
Do you experience any other troubles than latency or would you just like
to cut the proxy out of the path?
-jiri
Thanks in advance.
Girish
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
6 Mar
6 Mar
3:23 p.m.
Yes, my main concern is regarding the Latency
introduced due to round-trip media flow from Intranet
to RTP proxy of IPtel.
In my current setup, this latency is getting
unnecessarily introduced. Is there any way to avoid
it?
--- Jiri Kuthan <jiri(a)iptel.org> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
At 08:12 04/03/2008, girish kumar wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Hi,
I have 2 SIP based softphones (Xlite) registered on
IPtel.org SIP service and testing the calls among
them. These 2 softphones are behind different NAT
and
IPtel.org SIP proxy is replacing the SDP
connection
details in Call setup message (Invite and 200 OK)
with
RTPproxy IP/ports. Hence, RTPproxy is relaying
the
Voice media stream among them during the call.
Although, both the softphones are behind different
NAT
address but these are not Symmetric NATs and hence
RTP
can directly flow between these softphone using
STUN
discovery.
That's what I'm not sure about. If they were using
STUN,
iptelorg:5060 should not have detected them as
natted.
Any insight in this?
Is it possible to disable the RTP proxy behaviour
of
IPtel.org SER server for these 2 softphones
through
some configuration changes or any special header
parameter in call setup message?
In User Management web interface of IPtel.org,
there
is a option to specify the connectivity realm for
a
user account under My Account -> Other tab.
The description of this field is "connectivity
realm -
behind the same NAT or possibility to communicate
directly". I believe this field is playing some
part
in NAT transversal mechanism of Iptel.org SER
implementation.
I think too that was thought so, but I think it is
unused at the moment.
Can anyone please describe the significance of
this
user account parameter? Can it be used to disable
NAT
transversal of media stream for some individual
clients? I tried putting in same value of this
field
for 2 user accounts but Iptel.org SIP server
still
proxied media stream between these 2 user accounts
through its RTP proxy.
Do you experience any other troubles than latency or
would you just like
to cut the proxy out of the path?
-jiri
Thanks in advance.
Girish
Never miss a
thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
3:53 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] How to force IPtel.org SIP proxy not to include RTP proxy in Media path (achive peer-to-peer flow)
We may reintroduce indeed, I'm just not really sure when that's going to happen.
Have you BTW some latency numbers? (ping times, whatever...)
-jiri
At 15:23 06/03/2008, girish kumar wrote:
Yes, my main concern is regarding the Latency
introduced due to round-trip media flow from Intranet
to RTP proxy of IPtel.
In my current setup, this latency is getting
unnecessarily introduced. Is there any way to avoid
it?
--- Jiri Kuthan <jiri(a)iptel.org> wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
At 08:12 04/03/2008, girish kumar wrote:
____________________________________________________________________________________
Hi,
I have 2 SIP based softphones (Xlite) registered on
IPtel.org SIP service and testing the calls among
them. These 2 softphones are behind different NAT
and
IPtel.org SIP proxy is replacing the SDP
connection
details in Call setup message (Invite and 200 OK)
with
RTPproxy IP/ports. Hence, RTPproxy is relaying
the
Voice media stream among them during the call.
Although, both the softphones are behind different
NAT
address but these are not Symmetric NATs and hence
RTP
can directly flow between these softphone using
STUN
discovery.
That's what I'm not sure about. If they were using
STUN,
iptelorg:5060 should not have detected them as
natted.
Any insight in this?
Is it possible to disable the RTP proxy behaviour
of
IPtel.org SER server for these 2 softphones
through
some configuration changes or any special header
parameter in call setup message?
In User Management web interface of IPtel.org,
there
is a option to specify the connectivity realm for
a
user account under My Account -> Other tab.
The description of this field is "connectivity
realm -
behind the same NAT or possibility to communicate
directly". I believe this field is playing some
part
in NAT transversal mechanism of Iptel.org SER
implementation.
I think too that was thought so, but I think it is
unused at the moment.
Can anyone please describe the significance of
this
user account parameter? Can it be used to disable
NAT
transversal of media stream for some individual
clients? I tried putting in same value of this
field
for 2 user accounts but Iptel.org SIP server
still
proxied media stream between these 2 user accounts
through its RTP proxy.
Do you experience any other troubles than latency or
would you just like
to cut the proxy out of the path?
-jiri
Thanks in advance.
Girish
Never miss
a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
4:14 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] How to force IPtel.org SIP proxy not to include RTP proxy in Media path (achive peer-to-peer flow)
Jiri Kuthan wrote:
At 08:12 04/03/2008, girish kumar wrote:
Yes, it was meant to work this way. If both phones are configured to
be in the same connectivity realm then the server assumes that they can
reach each other directly and it does not enforce the RTP proxy, no
matter what does the NAT detection algorithm says.
Unfortunately this option is not currently used in the configuration
of the iptel.org SIP server.
I will try to put it back as time permits (because I need it myself
for my phones).
Hope that helps, Jan.
Hi,
I have 2 SIP based softphones (Xlite) registered on
IPtel.org SIP service and testing the calls among
them. These 2 softphones are behind different NAT and
IPtel.org SIP proxy is replacing the SDP connection
details in Call setup message (Invite and 200 OK) with
RTPproxy IP/ports. Hence, RTPproxy is relaying the
Voice media stream among them during the call.
Although, both the softphones are behind different NAT
address but these are not Symmetric NATs and hence RTP
can directly flow between these softphone using STUN
discovery.
That's what I'm not sure about. If they were using STUN,
iptelorg:5060 should not have detected them as natted.
Any insight in this?
Is it possible to disable the RTP proxy behaviour
of
IPtel.org SER server for these 2 softphones through
some configuration changes or any special header
parameter in call setup message?
In User Management web interface of IPtel.org, there
is a option to specify the connectivity realm for a
user account under My Account -> Other tab.
The description of this field is "connectivity realm -
behind the same NAT or possibility to communicate
directly". I believe this field is playing some part
in NAT transversal mechanism of Iptel.org SER
implementation.
I think too that was thought so, but I think it is
unused at the moment.
5918
days inactive
5920
days old
4 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
girish kumar -
Jan Janak -
Jiri Kuthan