Folks,
I've updated nathelper module in trunk. The following changes were made:
- Applied patch from Bogdan-Andrei IANCU iancu@fokus.fraunhofer.de, which allows to use nathelper without usrloc module if natpinger isn't used;
- fixed natpinger for clients without explicit transport specified in the Contact header field, which means that transport is UDP;
- fix_nated_contact() now ignores non-UDP contacts.
Please let me know if you will see any unusual problems with the module.
-Maxim
Thanks.
- fix_nated_contact() now ignores non-UDP contacts.
What about TCP?
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org]On Behalf Of Maxim Sobolev Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 12:33 PM To: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: [Serusers] nathelper updated
Folks,
I've updated nathelper module in trunk. The following changes were made:
- Applied patch from Bogdan-Andrei IANCU iancu@fokus.fraunhofer.de, which allows to use nathelper without usrloc module if natpinger isn't used;
- fixed natpinger for clients without explicit transport specified in the Contact header field, which means that transport is UDP;
- fix_nated_contact() now ignores non-UDP contacts.
Please let me know if you will see any unusual problems with the module.
-Maxim
_______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Dovid wrote:
Thanks.
- fix_nated_contact() now ignores non-UDP contacts.
What about TCP?
It will not work with TCP anyway, because TCP is connection-oriented.
-Maxim
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org]On Behalf Of Maxim Sobolev Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 12:33 PM To: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: [Serusers] nathelper updated
Folks,
I've updated nathelper module in trunk. The following changes were made:
- Applied patch from Bogdan-Andrei IANCU iancu@fokus.fraunhofer.de,
which allows to use nathelper without usrloc module if natpinger isn't used;
- fixed natpinger for clients without explicit transport specified in
the Contact header field, which means that transport is UDP;
- fix_nated_contact() now ignores non-UDP contacts.
Please let me know if you will see any unusual problems with the module.
-Maxim
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
Now I'm confused. Can't someone register with transport=tcp? If the Contact has a private IP address (or possibly more correctly anything other than the received address), don't we want to change it to the received address and save it that way? Doesn't fix_nated_contact do that?
Dovid
-----Original Message----- From: Maxim Sobolev [mailto:sobomax@portaone.com] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 2:13 PM To: Dovid Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: [Serusers] nathelper updated
Dovid wrote:
Thanks.
- fix_nated_contact() now ignores non-UDP contacts.
What about TCP?
It will not work with TCP anyway, because TCP is connection-oriented.
-Maxim
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org]On Behalf Of Maxim Sobolev Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 12:33 PM To: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: [Serusers] nathelper updated
Folks,
I've updated nathelper module in trunk. The following changes were made:
- Applied patch from Bogdan-Andrei IANCU iancu@fokus.fraunhofer.de,
which allows to use nathelper without usrloc module if natpinger isn't
used;
- fixed natpinger for clients without explicit transport specified in
the Contact header field, which means that transport is UDP;
- fix_nated_contact() now ignores non-UDP contacts.
Please let me know if you will see any unusual problems with the module.
-Maxim
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
Dovid wrote:
Now I'm confused. Can't someone register with transport=tcp? If the Contact has a private IP address (or possibly more correctly anything other than the received address), don't we want to change it to the received address and save it that way? Doesn't fix_nated_contact do that?
The problem is that even if we do that you won't be able to contact to that ip:port. As far as I know this is a fundamental difference between TCP and UDP servers located behind a NAT.
-Maxim
Dovid
-----Original Message----- From: Maxim Sobolev [mailto:sobomax@portaone.com] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 2:13 PM To: Dovid Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: [Serusers] nathelper updated
Dovid wrote:
Thanks.
- fix_nated_contact() now ignores non-UDP contacts.
What about TCP?
It will not work with TCP anyway, because TCP is connection-oriented.
-Maxim
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org]On Behalf Of Maxim Sobolev Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 12:33 PM To: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: [Serusers] nathelper updated
Folks,
I've updated nathelper module in trunk. The following changes were made:
- Applied patch from Bogdan-Andrei IANCU iancu@fokus.fraunhofer.de,
which allows to use nathelper without usrloc module if natpinger isn't
used;
- fixed natpinger for clients without explicit transport specified in
the Contact header field, which means that transport is UDP;
- fix_nated_contact() now ignores non-UDP contacts.
Please let me know if you will see any unusual problems with the module.
-Maxim
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
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-
Dovid -
Maxim Sobolev