[SR-Users] Mitigation of unavailable rtpproxy

[Corey Edwards]

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<miconda at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/6/13 2:58 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
>> 2. Is there any harm in calling unforce_rtp_proxy() for Call-IDs rtpproxy
>> doesn't know about?  is there a 'better' best practice for handling CANCELs
>> where it is unknown whether rtpproxy was engaged on the initial call
>> (because it is an option, nat_uac_detect, etc)?
>
> No, it is no harm to call rtpproxy for non-existing sessions. You can even
> skip it, there is a session timeout in rtpproxy -- I don't know default
> value, but probably can be set via command line parameter -- so if you are
> not short in ports, you can just leave rtpproxy alone with closed calls
> without calling unforce command.

I seem to recall that the default is to close the session after 60 seconds of
no RTP, but I'm not able to verify that right now.

Corey