Hi,
How does rtpproxy handle call hold? Normally when the call is put on hold, it doesn't have any rtp packets between two end UA. Would it cause rtpproxy to tear down the connection after timeout (default 60s)?
Thanks, Richard
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
On Jul 26, 2004 at 03:28, Richard mypop3mail@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi,
How does rtpproxy handle call hold? Normally when the call is put on hold, it doesn't have any rtp packets between two end UA. Would it cause rtpproxy to tear down the connection after timeout (default 60s)?
Yes, but on the other hand when you exit the on hold state the UA sends a re-INVITE. So if you properly handle re-INVITEs for natted calls, the re-INVITE will be caught by nathelper, the sdp re-written and the rtpproxy binding re-created (or updated if it already exists).
Andrei
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
On Jul 26, 2004 at 03:28, Richard mypop3mail@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi,
How does rtpproxy handle call hold? Normally when the call is put on hold, it doesn't have any rtp packets between two end UA. Would it cause rtpproxy to tear down the connection after timeout (default 60s)?
Yes, but on the other hand when you exit the on hold state the UA sends a re-INVITE. So if you properly handle re-INVITEs for natted calls, the re-INVITE will be caught by nathelper, the sdp re-written and the rtpproxy binding re-created (or updated if it already exists).
Andrei
actually when you enter on hold state, a re-INVITE with 0.0.0.0 addr in SDP is sent. So if catch also this one, you can tear down the rtp session without waiting for timeout. At the second re-Invite (when exit from on hold) you have to create a new rtp session
bogdan
Bogdan-Andrei IANCU wrote:
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
On Jul 26, 2004 at 03:28, Richard mypop3mail@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi,
How does rtpproxy handle call hold? Normally when the call is put on hold, it doesn't have any rtp packets between two end UA. Would it cause rtpproxy to tear down the connection after timeout (default 60s)?
Yes, but on the other hand when you exit the on hold state the UA sends a re-INVITE. So if you properly handle re-INVITEs for natted calls, the re-INVITE will be caught by nathelper, the sdp re-written and the rtpproxy binding re-created (or updated if it already exists).
Andrei
actually when you enter on hold state, a re-INVITE with 0.0.0.0 addr in SDP is sent. So if catch also this one, you can tear down the rtp session without waiting for timeout. At the second re-Invite (when exit from on hold) you have to create a new rtp session
AFAIK, using 0.0.0.0 in SDP for "hold" is depreciated. You should use a=inactive resp. a=sendonly or a=recvonly.
See RFC 3264, sec. 8.4 for details.
regards, klaus
At 12:12 PM 7/31/2004, Klaus Darilion wrote: AFAIK, using 0.0.0.0 in SDP for "hold" is depreciated. You should use a=inactive resp. a=sendonly or a=recvonly.
Indeed. Till it disappears from implementations, it will take a while though.
-jiri
Should I use "search" function in texttop to search for the following strings,
c=IN IP4 0.0.0.0. a=sendonly.
Thanks, Richard
--- Jiri Kuthan jiri@iptel.org wrote:
At 12:12 PM 7/31/2004, Klaus Darilion wrote: AFAIK, using 0.0.0.0 in SDP for "hold" is depreciated. You should use a=inactive resp. a=sendonly or a=recvonly.
Indeed. Till it disappears from implementations, it will take a while though.
-jiri
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Hi,
I've installed SER 0.8.14 and seem to get the warning below:
- WARNING: rtpp_test: support for RTP proxy has been disabled temporarily -
This was posted a while ago but I haven't seen a reply to it yet. Could anyone point me to any doc on this?
Cheers, Gerald.
It is likely that you have rtpproxy/ser version mismatch. Update rtpproxy to the latest version from cvs and you should be fine.
Regards,
Maxim
Begumisa Gerald M wrote:
Hi,
I've installed SER 0.8.14 and seem to get the warning below:
WARNING: rtpp_test: support for RTP proxy has been disabled temporarily
This was posted a while ago but I haven't seen a reply to it yet. Could anyone point me to any doc on this?
Cheers, Gerald.
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul -
Begumisa Gerald M -
Bogdan-Andrei IANCU -
Jiri Kuthan -
Klaus Darilion -
Maxim Sobolev -
Richard