[Serusers] DNS Resolution of SDP-"Connection Address" at SER

[Gerhard Zweimüller]

Thanks for your answer.

The funny thing is: I am trying quite hard to convince the vendor (actually a well-known VoIP-chip/module/appliance maker) that FQDN in SDP is a good (and allowed) thing.

Even more funny: In the preceding firmware-release FQDN was no problem. But in the current release they apparently *removed* the FQDN-support and now they try to convince me that FQDN in SDP is not allowed :-(  Although I sent them RFCs and everything to prove them wrong.

But there you go.

I tried your suggestion with fix_nated_sdp and so far it seems to work. Thanks for the tip!

Hopefully the vendor will change its RFC-support policy soon.

Kind regards,
Gerhard
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Zeus Ng [mailto:zeus.ng at isquare.com.au] 
Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 8:30 AM
To: Gerhard Zweimüller
Cc: serusers at lists.iptel.org
Subject: RE: [Serusers] DNS Resolution of SDP-"Connection Address" at SER

Forcing SER to do stuff in order to fix problem UA implementation, I don't think this is a good approach. Using FQDN as connection information in SDP is the recommended approach in RFC 2327, though few UA do this. I would suggest you contact the vendor to fix the UA that can't work with DNS.

Have a look on the fix_nated_sdp() function in nathelper. I haven't tried this before but it might work. However, there is no guarantee. Let us know if it works.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gerhard Zweimüller
> Sent: Saturday, 11 June 2005 11:07 PM
> To: serusers at lists.iptel.org
> Subject: [Serusers] DNS Resolution of SDP-"Connection Address" at SER
> 
> 
>  Hi Serusers,
> 
> I have a problem with DNS resolution in SIP/SDP "Connection 
> Information"
> / "ConnectionAddress". Maybe somebody can help me:
> 
> In the network we use SIP-UAs that are integrated into ADSL-Modems 
> from Allied Telesyn (AT RG 634).
> The SIP-client itself works OK. But when the unit is given a 
> system-name in the configuration, it will always use its DNS-name 
> instead of its IP-addr as "Connection Address" in the "Connection 
> Information" in SDP in INVITE and corresponding OK messages.
> 
> Now we want to add SIP-UAs that are NOT capable of resolving DNS-Names 
> in the "Connection Address" field.
> Alle messages pass through SER of course and the SDP-part so far 
> remains unchanged.
> 
> Now my question to the list:
> Is there a simple way of forcing SER to do the DNS-resolution of in 
> incoming message, put in the IP-address in "Connection Address" and 
> forward it to the other UA?
> 
> Thanks a lot in advance!
> Gerhard
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> 



__________________________________________________________________________________
Dieses Mail wurde vom Infotech SecureMail Service ueberprueft und fuer sicher befunden.
Fuer weitere Informationen zu Infotech SecureMail Service waehlen Sie bitte: www.infotech.at/securemail/

This email has been scanned by Infotech SecureMail Service and it has been classified as secure.
For more information on Infotech SecureMail direct your web browser to: www.infotech.at/securemail/