[sr-dev] [SR-Users] rtpproxy (k): removal of force_rtpproxy

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

On 9/21/10 6:23 PM, César Pinto Magán wrote:
> I mean for a more detailed functionality and capabilities.
ok, understand. Probably we should open a wiki page for it. There are 
one or two configs (perhaps pretty old now) in nathelper module to show 
bridging mode.

Cheers,
Daniel

>   The bridge mode appears in http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/SER+example+outboundproxy and it is talked about in this list (I had to search deep int the list records to find some about). It is supposed to be used in a multihomed site, but it doesn't work very fine for me (I had to put explicitly the IPs to be used)
>
>
>
> César Pinto (2439)
> +34 91 787 23 00 alhambra-eidos.es
>
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda at gmail.com]
> Enviado el: martes, 21 de septiembre de 2010 18:03
> Para: César Pinto Magán
> CC: Alex Balashov; sr-users at lists.sip-router.org; sr-dev
> Asunto: Re: [SR-Users] [sr-dev] rtpproxy (k): removal of force_rtpproxy
>
>
>    Hi Cesar,
>
> are you looking for rtpproxy protocol format or for a more detailed
> functionality of rtpproxy capabilities (e.g., what means bridge mode)?
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>
> On 9/21/10 5:52 PM, César Pinto Magán wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I'm actually using rtpproxy_offer/answer(), and it works fine for us. I had to move from force_rtp_rpoxy() because it had several rare behaviors and the use of the offer/answer model solved them. It is very simple to implement.
>>
>> By the way, is there any type of documentation about rtpproxy and their commands (i.e. how works the bridge/switch mode of the rtp). The rtpproxy wiki says nothing about it.
>>
>>
>> César Pinto (2439)
>> +34 91 787 23 00 alhambra-eidos.es
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Mensaje original-----
>> De: sr-users-bounces at lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-bounces at lists.sip-router.org] En nombre de Alex Balashov
>> Enviado el: martes, 21 de septiembre de 2010 17:32
>> Para: daniel at kamailio.org
>> CC: sr-users at lists.sip-router.org; sr-dev
>> Asunto: Re: [SR-Users] [sr-dev] rtpproxy (k): removal of force_rtpproxy
>>
>> On 09/21/2010 11:27 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>>
>>> personally I haven't tested much those functions. Maybe is better for
>>> now to mark it obsolete and add a warning message at startup (via
>>> fixup), then remove it with next release, allowing some maturity tests
>>> for new ones. I am saying that also because most of existing configs
>>> out there are using this function and new people will look for it.
>> I agree.
>>
>> All of our configs use force_rtp_proxy(), but I would be happy to
>> migrate them;  however, I need some reasonable assurance that
>> rtpproxy_offer/answer() will actually work.
>>
>> As can be seen from a number of previous threads on the list, I had to
>> call force_rtp_proxy() to get several common scenarios to work, even
>> though supposedly rtpproxy_offer/answer() are just wrappers (the code
>> would suggest that), and even though the 'nathelper' documentation
>> says that supposedly they will accept and use the same flags as those
>> listed for force_rtp_proxy() the same way.  It has not been true in my
>> experience.
>>

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com