[Serusers] SER and NAT

[Tjapko ITS Consult@ncy]

Thanks a lot,

Still I am lost. Mediaproxy works fine when Nated Ep's are calling out to
PSTN or not NAted Ep's but I can't call to any NATed EP with te example
ser.cfg that comes with mediaproxy.

Mediaproxy is trying hard and doesn't give any error message but in the
sessions.py and the log I can see that the destination address for the NAted
IP (EP) is missing.

I read the readme and tried everything possible but unfortunately without
the desired result.

Nathelper seems clear on this using the modparam ("registrar", "natflag",
6).

Like the example in the answer from Klaus, registration from any nated ep
will be flagged. Calling to any nated EP will be easy because the
destination address is flagged and saved during registration and the
t_on_reply will check if the flag is set and subsequently force proxy on the
recorded address. At least this is how I understand it.

Studying the readme for mediaproxy tells that nat_uac_test() has to be
replaced with client_nat_test() but according the readme the only difference
between the 2 is that the latter function will NOT check if the SDP body has
private IP's.

How can I use mediaproxy so that when calling to an NATed EP mediaproxy will
be able to generate the correct destination address. Does anybody has a
snippet from a succesfull ser.cfg for me that I can study. The comment from
Adrian to replace fixed_nated_contact with fixed_contact I understand but
not in relation with the setflag mentioned in the same snippet. IMHO setflag
is a nathelper modparam. There must be something else that I overlook.

Another issue that I like confirmed is that the readme states that the Nated
EP should have outbound proxy server configured for a symmetric EP not an
a-symmetric EP. . Is this true?

To make a long story short...How can call TO a NATed EP with mediaproxy so
it knows the correct destination address and is it neccesary to configure
outbound proxy for a symmetric NAted EP's.

My gateway provider tells me to drop all this and use a STUN server in
stead. :-(

Any comments will be appriciated,

Tjapko.








-----Original Message-----
From: serusers-bounces at iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces at lists.iptel.org]On
Behalf Of Klaus Darilion
Sent: Martes, 01 de Junio de 2004 07:10 p.m.
To: Adrian Georgescu
Cc: serusers at lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] SER and NAT


oops, sorry. I'ver never used the mediaproxy module.

klaus

Adrian Georgescu wrote:
> Function fix_contact() is available within mediaproxy.so with same
> meaning as its nathelper.so counterpart.
>
> Adrian
>
>  >
>  >You have to rewrite the REGISTER message before saving the
> locations!
>
> if (nat_uac_test("2")) {
> force_rport();
> fix_nated_contact(); # from nathelper module
> append_hf("P-Behind-NAT: Yes\r\n");
> setflag(5); #natflag
> .....
> .....
> save(location); # user with natflag set will be
> # pinged to keep NAT binding alive
>
>
> regards,
> klaus
> Tjapko ITS Consult at ncy wrote:
>  >/ Hello List,
> />/
> />/ In my fierce battle to overcome the NAT problem I have now running
> SER and
> />/ Mediaproxy without any problem. Whenever any Nated EP like to call
> to PSTN
> />/ or a non nated EP the call goes ok. Whenever I try to call from a
> non nated
> />/ EP to a NATed EP the call does not go through.
> />/
> />/ It seems like that the destination address is not known by
> mediaproxy so it
> />/ can't forward the call to the correct EP.
> />/
> />/ My question is whether this problem might be caused by my ser.cfg or
> that
> />/ this is typical SIP behaviour.
> />/
> />/ In other words is it possible to call to any EP that is behind
> Symmetric
> />/ NAT.
>
> /
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers at lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.693 / Virus Database: 454 - Release Date: 31/05/2004

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.698 / Virus Database: 455 - Release Date: 02/06/2004