[Serusers] NAT & RTPPRoxy

Gary Brewer gary.brewer at rawcoms.com
Wed Sep 3 12:54:17 CEST 2003


>BTW, the webpage says that you can find out the IP and ports used by
>yourself if the NAT doesn't support UPnP and make the API to use it.

Yes I believe you can create an IRTCPortManager and use GetMapping to
specify your AV ports and SIP Signalling) when you are starting a session
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/rtcclnt/rt
c/irtcportmanager_getmapping.asp)

However the registration process (not the INVITE) does
However the registration process does not appear to allow you to communicate
your external address, I don't see where it allows you to do that anywhere
in the API.

The problem is I don't want to support uPnP at all, I want to support
non-uPnP NATS.

Thanks for the FCP link, I will look into that!


Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Janak [mailto:jan at iptel.org] 
Sent: 03 September 2003 11:39
To: Gary Brewer
Cc: serusers at lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] NAT & RTPPRoxy

BTW, the webpage says that you can find out the IP and ports used by
yourself if the NAT doesn't support UPnP and make the API to use it.

BTW2: I am aware of one IP phone that supports UPnP:
http://www.act-tel.com.tw

Those guys had UPnP testbed at the last SIPIt.

 Jan.

On 03-09 11:14, Gary Brewer wrote:
> Thanks Jan,
> 
> I should have made myself a little bit clearer; I am using the RTC 1.2 API
>
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/rtcclnt/rt
> c/real_time_communications_rtc_client_start_page.asp)
> 
> What I find the most interesting is -
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/rtcclnt/rtc
> /traversal_of_upnp_enabled_nats.asp specifically the last sentence of the
> third paragraph. Why I can't provide it my external IP address and port on
> the NAT is annoying! I wonder if it would be possible to modify the
REGISTER
> message on the way to the SIP server and change the IP:Port to my external
> NAT address mapping - or get NATHelper to do this for me.
> 
> Gary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Janak [mailto:jan at iptel.org] 
> Sent: 03 September 2003 10:34
> To: Gary Brewer
> Cc: serusers at lists.iptel.org
> Subject: Re: [Serusers] NAT & RTPPRoxy
> 
> Hello, comments inline. All the NAT stuff is quite complicated and
> whether it would work or not depends on many factors.
> 
> On 03-09 09:55, Gary Brewer wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I have come across a similar problem. I want to use the A/V facilities
of
> > Windows Messenger if one or both of my clients are behind a NAT. I
realise
> > that it seems to be impossible to get this to work if the NAT is
> symmetric.
> > (See: RFC3489 "Applicability Statement")
> 
>   That depends. It could work even with symmetric NAT if the client you
>   are using does support symmetric signalling and RTP (I am not sure
Windows
> 
>   Messenger is). That means the user agent must be ready to receive SIP 
>   requests and responses on the same port which was used as the source
port 
>   for sending SIP messages. Also it must support symmetric RTP to make
>   media work.
> 
>   Also the user agent must create REGISTERs containing public IP of the
>   NAT (can be determined using STUN, for example), or you would have to
>   use nathelper module on the server.
> 
> > If only one of my clients is behind a NAT then it would seem I would
have
> to
> > communicate my NATs external address and port mapping to the non-NAT'd
> > client (possibly with the help of STUN) in my SIP Invite SDP message. I
> 
>    Yes, but Windows Messenger doesn't support STUN.
> 
> > would also have to setup UDP mappings for SIP, RTP/RTCP Audio Video on
my
> > NAT. Are my A/V port mappings also included in the Invite SDP message?
> 
>   In case of symmetrict RTP, the client in the public internet will
>   ignore what it receives in SDP and will send media back to the same IP
>   and port from which it comes from the other side. That makes the
>   communication through a NAT possible, but the client behind the NAT
>   must send first media package (that packet will open a pinhole in the
>   NAT). Also both sides must support symmetrict RTP and the client
>   behind the NAT must signal that it is using this approach.
> 
>   If the clients do not support symmetric signalling, then some kind of
>   "NAT configuration" would be necesarry.
> 
>   For example, many user agents can be configured to use ports from a
>   specified port range only for RTP (let's say ports 10000-10100). You
>   can then configure your NAT box to forward all the ports from the
>   range back to your user agent.
> 
> > If both clients are NAT'd then what is the approach? I don't see how I
> > register with the SIP server using an external NAT address (my guess is
> this
> > is what I would have to use if I wanted anyone on the other side of the
> NAT
> > to be able to see me). MSFT have seemed to got around this problem by
> > recommended everyone to use uPnP enabled NATs, which will automatically
> bind
> > to an external address on the NAT and, I assume, use this when they
> register
> > with the SIP server.
> 
>   If both clients are behind NATs then you would probably have to use an
>   RTP proxy which will be placed in the public internet.
> 
> > RTPProxy is here https://demo.portaone.com/~sobomax/PortaSIP/ how does
> > RTPProxy help in the NAT situation, does it at all?
> 
>   See the previous insertion. It could help in the case when both
>   clients are behind NATs and it could possibly help in some other cases
>   too.
> 
> > Please correct me where I am wrong, I am still trying to get my head
> around
> > all of this! Has anyone successfully been able to get any of the
scenarios
> > above working (with AV)?
> 
>   There is a couple of people who are running their clients behind NATs
>   on the mailing list, so I hope they could give you some advice.
> 
>   Jan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This email may contain material that is confidential and/or privileged.
It
> is for the sole use of the intended recipient.  Any review, reliance or
> distribution by others of the e-mail or its contents or forwarding without
> express permission is strictly prohibited.  No contractual undertakings
are
> accepted by virtue of transmission of this e-mail unless expressly stated
> otherwise in the text of the e-mail itself.  If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Contact us
> directly or via our website at www.rawcommunications.com.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers




This email may contain material that is confidential and/or privileged.  It
is for the sole use of the intended recipient.  Any review, reliance or
distribution by others of the e-mail or its contents or forwarding without
express permission is strictly prohibited.  No contractual undertakings are
accepted by virtue of transmission of this e-mail unless expressly stated
otherwise in the text of the e-mail itself.  If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Contact us
directly or via our website at www.rawcommunications.com.




More information about the sr-users mailing list