[Serusers] FCP module in SER

Kevin Chu kevin.chu at viditec.com
Thu Sep 25 15:02:56 CEST 2003


Hi Nils

I tried to use and understand fcp daemon for the past few weeks, but I still
have problem for using it.

The outbound RTP traffic can pass through NAT/FW without problem, but the
inbound
one can not. I tried to disable FW, but the problem was still the same. It
seems
the problem was coming from the NAT part.

I checked the debug message from fcpd and I saw message like this one:
>> fcpd[4541]: INTERPRET: succesfully reserved IP=16885952 Port=1122-1123
for origin IP=1694607552 Port=42446-42447

The ports (1122, 1123) shown in the message were actually used by external
UA for
sending packets. Does the message mean the connections had been reserved
successfully
for the inbound traffic? If yes, I don't understand why the inbound traffic
can not
pass through.

I also checked the ip_conntrack file, but I only saw the records for the
outbound
RTP/RTCP traffic. Is that the reason why the inbound traffic can not pass
through?
or I should check the record from another place?

Thanks,
Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: Nils Ohlmeier [mailto:nils at iptel.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 2:26 PM
To: Kevin Chu; SER Users
Subject: Re: [Serusers] FCP module in SER


On Monday 11 August 2003 17:04, Kevin Chu wrote:
> It's mentioned in the release notes of SER 0.8.11 that there is a
> a new experimental features called fcp.
>
> Is that module the implementation of fcp-client mentioned in this
> discussion?
> http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2003-January/000111.html

Yes it is.

> I can't find the fcp module from anywhere. May I know where I can find it
> and
> the latest status?

You can find the first version as attachment at this mail
http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serdev/2003-April/000157.html
Please contact the author Jaime directly for the latest version.

The module for SER is not really the problem. But the FCP server is not
wroking really good. Their are some circumstances when the whole setup do
not
work. So FCP can only be stated as very unstable, and we should/will remove
it from the docs.
Their is a chance that i will rewrite the FCP daemon, but for that i first
need working ctnetlink support from the netfilter guys, which is not
available yet.

Regards
  Nils





More information about the sr-users mailing list