Hi Daniel-Constantin! Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: Sorry if you get that impression, I'm just trying to do good... It's not the answer to everything, that's for sure. However, there is actually a config script without the auth, so it could help him for the untangling he mentioned. To me it looked like he hadn't had a look at that script, but I admit my answer was a bit schematic and was not intended to address anything else than the untangling problem. You see, people who subscribe to the list are not yet informed about the document when they subscribe (we don't want to do that until we are 100% sure that errors and typos have been corrected, which will be pretty soon). Until then newcomers must be informed either by looking/searching in the archives or as you call it: through "intoxicating" emails to people who seem to have a question that may be resolvable through the documentation. Sorry about that, but I'm sure that you welcome the reduction of similar-sounding newcomer-questions, and I'm sure that if you had read the document ;-), you would find it useful to sometimes refer to it, too! Jeff, to your second email: By using ONsip.org config files, a lot of people will have the same structure and it's easier to help you by understanding the changes you have done. If not, you must at least include an ngrep trace of the messages. It seems that messages are not coming through to the UAs behind NAT. It may be because the UA is not correctly detected as behind NAT, check with serctl ul show that the NAT flag is set (The GettingStarted document explains in detail the various nat test values.) Depending on your setup (ex. more than one outbound proxy), you may also have to handle routing to the correct proxy (which will be able to traverse NAT for a particular UA). There was a long discussion on this 1-2 months ago, and Klaus Darillion posted a patch he made for an outbound proxy. You may want to find that post. g-)

Hi Klaus! Im very sorry for the late reply. This thread messages got lost in my mailbox. Well as for your question my desired set-up is B. By the way, I am now able to make successfull registrations but get lost invites. Please see my other newly sent mail. Thanks for all the help guys! Regards, _jeff On 6/15/05, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:

I have never tried that example, but I assume they are just two other instances of the location table. g-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joao Pereira" <joao.pereira(a)fccn.pt> To: <serusers(a)lists.iptel.org> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 7:40 PM Subject: [Serusers] outbound proxy tables