[Serusers] Same NAT again

[Greger V. Teigre]

> Sorry for the delay in answering this - I am not in the office this
> week.  Using Greger's advice, I was able to get the detection of same
> NAT working (sometimes - depends on me calling nathelper I think), but
> due to other pressures (to do with getting cascading rtpproxy set up
> with rtpproxy running in bridge mode) I have had to delay implementing
> the solution fully. When I do I will of course share with all...  I
> think that it will be a case of doing the detection before messing with
> the contact with nathelper, and then using that to decide whether
> fix_nated_contact is called.

Sounds like the right approach. Look forward to hearing from you on this.
g-)

> Noel
> Greger V. Teigre wrote:
>
>> http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2005-November/025541.html
>> I never heard from Noel if he made it work. Noel?
>> g-)
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "deviator" <deviator at inbox.ru>
>> To: <serusers at lists.iptel.org>
>> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 8:00 PM
>> Subject: [Serusers] Same NAT again
>>
>>
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> Can someone explain me how i can correctly check if 2 UA's are behind 
>>> same NAT ?
>>>
>>> for example: A and B UA's have private 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2, SER 
>>> have a public ip
>>>
>>> A calling B
>>>
>>> For A all is clear for me - SRCIP have an A external ip and i can use it
>>> But i dont see any B external ip, RURI have a private ip part 
>>> (192.168.1.2)
>>>
>>> Pls show me the way!
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>