[Serusers] How to force IPtel.org SIP proxy not to include RTP proxy in Media path (achive peer-to-peer flow)

[Jiri Kuthan]

We may reintroduce indeed, I'm just not really sure when that's going to happen.
Have you BTW some latency numbers? (ping times, whatever...)

-jiri

At 15:23 06/03/2008, girish kumar wrote:
>Yes, my main concern is regarding the Latency
>introduced due to round-trip media flow from Intranet
>to RTP proxy of IPtel.
>
>In my current setup, this latency is getting
>unnecessarily introduced. Is there any way to avoid
>it?
>
>--- Jiri Kuthan <jiri at iptel.org> wrote:
>
>> At 08:12 04/03/2008, girish kumar wrote:
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >I have 2 SIP based softphones (Xlite) registered on
>> >IPtel.org SIP service and testing the calls among
>> >them. These 2 softphones are behind different NAT
>> and
>> >IPtel.org SIP proxy is replacing the SDP connection
>> >details in Call setup message (Invite and 200 OK)
>> with
>> >RTPproxy IP/ports. Hence, RTPproxy is relaying the
>> >Voice media stream among them during the call.
>> >
>> >Although, both the softphones are behind different
>> NAT
>> >address but these are not Symmetric NATs and hence
>> RTP
>> >can directly flow between these softphone using
>> STUN
>> >discovery.
>> 
>> That's what I'm not sure about. If they were using
>> STUN,
>> iptelorg:5060 should not have detected them as
>> natted.
>> Any insight in this?
>> 
>> 
>> >Is it possible to disable the RTP proxy behaviour
>> of
>> >IPtel.org SER server for these 2 softphones through
>> >some configuration changes or any special header
>> >parameter in call setup message? 
>> >
>> >In User Management web interface of IPtel.org,
>> there
>> >is a option to specify the connectivity realm for a
>> >user account under My Account -> Other tab.
>> >
>> >The description of this field is "connectivity
>> realm -
>> >behind the same NAT or possibility to communicate
>> >directly". I believe this field is playing some
>> part
>> >in NAT transversal mechanism of Iptel.org SER
>> >implementation.
>> 
>> I think too that was thought so, but I think it is 
>> unused at the moment.
>> 
>> 
>> >Can anyone please describe the significance of this
>> >user account parameter? Can it be used to disable
>> NAT
>> >transversal of media stream for some individual
>> >clients? I tried putting in same value of this
>> field
>> >for 2 user accounts but Iptel.org SIP server still
>> >proxied media stream between these 2 user accounts
>> >through its RTP proxy.
>> 
>> Do you experience any other troubles than latency or
>> would you just like
>> to cut the proxy out of the path?
>> 
>> -jiri
>> 
>> 
>> >Thanks in advance.
>> >Girish
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >     
>>
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>> >Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
>> >http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Serusers mailing list
>> >Serusers at lists.iptel.org
>> >http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/
>> 
>> 
>
>
>
>      ____________________________________________________________________________________
>Be a better friend, newshound, and 
>know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 
>
>_______________________________________________
>Serusers mailing list
>Serusers at lists.iptel.org
>http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers



--
Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/