[SR-Users] Kamailio / rtpproxy behaviour on dual-homed box
Steve Davies
steve-lists-srusers at connection-telecom.com
Fri Aug 16 16:45:57 CEST 2013
On 16 August 2013 16:31, Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> wrote:
> I think this thread may help you:
>
> http://lists.sip-router.org/**pipermail/sr-users/2010-**
> October/065669.html<http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/2010-October/065669.html>
>
>
Hi Alex,
Thanks for the pointer!
I see that the kamailio.cfg that comes with 4.0.3 handles rtpproxy via the
new rtpproxy_manage call:
# RTPProxy control
route[NATMANAGE] {
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
if (is_request()) {
if(has_totag()) {
if(check_route_param("nat=yes")) {
setbflag(FLB_NATB);
}
}
}
if (!(isflagset(FLT_NATS) || isbflagset(FLB_NATB)))
return;
rtpproxy_manage("co"); #
<---------------------------------------------------
if (is_request()) {
if (!has_totag()) {
if(t_is_branch_route()) {
add_rr_param(";nat=yes");
}
}
}
if (is_reply()) {
if(isbflagset(FLB_NATB)) {
add_contact_alias();
}
}
#!endif
return;
}
this route block is called from a few places.
Seems like I will need to improve this to take account of the direction of
the message and use "ie" or "ei" as appropriate?
Thanks,
Steve
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20130816/c5795584/attachment.html>
More information about the sr-users
mailing list