[Serusers] HELP me: Confuse between mediaproxy and STUN

[Marian Dumitru]

Hi Jiri,

Indeed, in real world scenarios, to be able to cop with all types of 
NATs in the most efficient way, you need to use a combination of server 
and client NAT traversal.

Best regards,
Marian

Jiri Kuthan wrote:
> That's actually not true -- STUN clients fail to traverse symmetric NAT
> (see RFC3489) without a media proxy.
> 
> -jiri
> 
> At 08:08 PM 3/22/2005, Marian Dumitru wrote:
> 
>>Hi Charles,
>>
>>It's correct, if _all_ clients use STUN (and a correct implementation) you don't need mediaproxy or nathelper.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Marian
>>
>>Charles Wang wrote:
>>
>>>Marian,
>>>Thank you very much for your explain. So, if a client side with STUN support and setting it correctly, is it
>>>not necessary
>>>to use media proxy(outboumd proxy setting)? If yes, my clients with
>>>STUN should
>>>can talk to each other without setting outbound proxy. 
>>>But in fact, I test this with two X-Pro running on two NATed PCs. I
>>>find out they are always send its RTP to my SER not send to each other
>>>directly. So it will add my SER's loading. Can you tell me how to
>>>change my ser.cfg to avoid such condiction? Please....
>>>
>>>
>>>On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 19:26:35 +0100, Marian Dumitru
>>><marian.dumitru at voice-sistem.ro> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hello Charles,
>>>>
>>>>Just to give you the big picture about NAT traversal mechanisms:
>>>>
>>>>STUN is used to perform the NAT traversal on the client side - the UAC
>>>>is NAT aware (via STUN) and sends SIP messages using the public IP. From
>>>>server side, the UAC will look like a public one, so there no logic
>>>>required on server for this case.
>>>>
>>>>nathelper and mediaproxy are rather equivalent and implement NAT
>>>>traversal on server side - UAC has nothing to know about NAT and send
>>>>messages with private IP. The server takes care about detecting a
>>>>correcting messages coming from behind a NAT.
>>>>
>>>>Best regards
>>>>Marian
>>>>
>>>>Charles Wang wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi, ALL:
>>>>>
>>>>>I can't not make sure my view point between STUN and mediaproxy.
>>>>>Please explain for me.
>>>>>In my view, if NATed UACs want to make a call,
>>>>>the solutions shall be nathelper, mediaproxy or building a STUN server.
>>>>>
>>>>>If NATed UACs set their own STUN server's IP correctly,
>>>>>and they want to talk with each other will be in a "direct"
>>>>>(RTP will not pass through SER) mode, is it correct? And the STUN server
>>>>>will tell our UACs what's their NAT gateway's IP(behind what kind
>>>>>of network environment , and UACs will send these informations to SER?
>>>>>In another word, it is not necessary to use media proxy to pass their
>>>>>RTP channel?
>>>>>
>>>>>If it is correctly, so we will not to set any mediaproxy daemon for
>>>>>them, is it correct?
>>>>>If it is not, can anyone tell me why it is not?
>>>>>
>>>>>If ignore the STUN issue, I use the mediaproxy's ser.cfg as my template ser.cfg.
>>>>>But I find all UACs's RTP packages will pass through my SER wether
>>>>>behind NAT or not( read IPs ). How can I modify my ser.cfg and make a
>>>>>call directly without pass through SER if two UACs are all real IPs?
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Voice System
>>>>http://www.voice-system.ro
>>>
>>-- 
>>Voice System
>>http://www.voice-system.ro
>>
>>_______________________________________________

-- 
Voice System
http://www.voice-system.ro