[Serusers] New versions of RTP proxy/nathelper commited

[Jan Janak]

What change do you mean ? I reviewed and commited some changes on behalf
of Tristan, so please blame me (and provide me with more details if
possible) :-).

Could you make sure that the version before my commit works ?

 Jan.

On 30-01 11:14, Andres wrote:
> Update...
> 
> I have now tested multiple versions of nathelper from January.  The 
> problem appears after the changes made by Tristan Colgate on 
> 2004-01-16.  Nathelper/rtpproxy works fine on the version from 2004-01-15.
> 
> Can you take a look at this Tristan?  Maxim?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -- 
> Andres
> Network Admin
> http://www.telesip.net
> 
> 
> 
> Andres wrote:
> 
> >Hi Maxim,
> >
> >I am in the process of testing this new version in our lab with 
> >0.8.13.  We have been using the older versions with great success for 
> >many months now.   But the new version does not work.  We are testing 
> >with Grandstream and Sipura units.  When a Sipura calls another 
> >Sipura,  the nathelper/rtpproxy fails to insert the proper "Connection 
> >Information (c)" in the SDP. Instead of filling in the IP Address of 
> >the RTPProxy it just leaves the same address and adds these  four 
> >characters "\000" to the end which seem to make the other Sipura 
> >unhappy because it terminates the call right away with a "488- Not 
> >Acceptable" Message.
> >
> >When a Grandstream is making the call, the same thing happens, with 
> >the exception of the four characters.  (IP Address in Connection 
> >Information (c) is not updated)
> >
> >The Ports do seem to get changed appropiately by the 
> >nathelper/rtpproxy in both cases.  But since the IP is not substituted 
> >there is no chance of audio being setup properly.
> >
> >I can send the Ethereal traces if  you want.
> >
> >Let me know what we can do to fix this issue.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers