[SR-Users] Rtpproxy re-INVITE handling

[Spencer Thomason]

Hi Daniel,
Thanks for your help with this.  Here is a trace:
http://pastebin.com/pXeFbwBz

I see the nat=yes parameter added to the Route header.  

I've posted the script here:
http://pastebin.com/2qwHYHvj

Forgive my ignorance, I can't tell what I'm doing wrong.

Thanks!
Spencer


On Aug 30, 2012, at 12:51 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> if your config it is based on the default one, the Route header for within dialog requests is marked by a parameter, nat=yes, that is used to decide whether to do rtpproxy or not.
> 
> So, if you have a custom config, check the default one for the nat traversal handling part.
> 
> Cheers,
> Daniel
> 
> On 8/30/12 12:39 AM, Spencer Thomason wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I'm using Kamailio 3.2.4 for NAT traversal using rtpproxy_manage() in a largely stock script.  Everything works great until the far end (on a public ip) sends a t.38 re-INVITE.  The 200OK from the NATed UAC then doesn't trigger rtpproxy and the private IP in the sdp causes the fax to fail.  Any help handling these re-INVITEs would be greatly appreciated.  I'm happy to post traces if that helps describe the situation.  The network topology looks like this:
>> 
>> NATed UAC -> Kamailio on a public IP -> UAS on a public IP  
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Spencer
>> 
>> 
>> Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
>> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
> 
> -- 
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
> http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
> Kamailio Advanced Training, Berlin, Nov 5-8, 2012 - http://asipto.com/u/kat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20120830/30662fb9/attachment.htm>