[Serusers] NAT considerations...

[Andres]

Giovanni Balasso wrote:

>Just some thoughts based on my experience...
>After months trying to make everything work using rtpproxy-mediaproxy with 
>almost everything accomplished but video, I tried to switch to stun solution. 
>All my problems are gone now, I have audio, video, presence and instant 
>messages working like a charm. And most important media server doesn't flow 
>thru my server so network load remains very low. I have been testing for some 
>days now and I'm quite happy since I still have to stumble on major problems.
>Now some considerations... On a poll onsip.org STUN usage is very low and 
>rtpproxy-mediaproxy rule as NAT trasversal solution. Why don't people use 
>stun? Has it some major drawbacks I still haven't found? What are main 
>advantages of rtpproxy-mediaproxy solutions?
>I'm really curious to know serusers opinions about this issue.
>
>thank you all for your two cents ;)
>
>  
>
STUN does not work if your NAT is Symmetric.  For example all Linux NATs 
or routers with Linux OS like the Linksys ones.  Unless you have full 
control on what type of NAT your customer will deploy, it will be very 
hard to stick to an all STUN solution.

-- 
Andres
Network Admin
http://www.telesip.net