[Serusers] NAT Traversal using nathelper module

[O.]

thanks for the clarification. it looks like SER0.9.6 is step ahead or we
have to deal with the extra traffic.

thanks,
O.  

On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 10:45 +0200, Ladislav Andel wrote:
> Unfortunately, up to version 0.9.6 SER doesn't know if the public client 
> supports symmetric RTP and active/passive direction attribute. So SER 
> will make sure that both clients can hear each other (both way RTP 
> stream between clients) and involves RTP proxy. On the other hand, 
> clients behind NAT  has  to  support  symmetric RTP because they would 
> not work behind NAT.
> 
> So you have two options:
> 1) Not use rtpproxy at all in your ser.cfg and then you have to now that 
> your clients support symmetric RTP
> But if you have two clients behind then it would not work.
> 2) Use RTPproxy even if one client is behind NAT.. This will work with 
> all scenarios.
> 
> Ladislav
> 
> O. wrote:
> > thanks, so we have to keep the proxy.
> > In this case when one of the client will be behind nat does the proxy
> > will transfer the RTP? or still the the RTP will be route without proxy
> > involved?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > O. 
> >
> > On Sat, 2006-05-06 at 23:57 +0200, Ladislav Andel wrote:
> >   
> >> Hi O.,
> >> This will work only with one NAT involved in SIP dialog. If you have 
> >> both clients behind NAT then RTPproxy or Mediaproxy is necessary. Also, 
> >> your clients has to support active/passive direction attribute and be 
> >> able to read source IP:port address from the first RTP packet received.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Ladislav
> >>
> >>
> >> O. wrote:
> >>     
> >>> Hi Kostas and samuel,
> >>>
> >>> In the case you are describing, using nathelper will replace the
> >>> rtpproxy or medianproxy? It looks to me that in this case the rtp will
> >>> be route in between the sip client, without any proxy. In the
> >>> configuration you mentioned the ser is on public IP?     
> >>> if this is the case it looks much better the proxy from the load
> >>> prospective.   
> >>>
> >>> thanks, 
> >>> O.
> >>>   
> >>>       
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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