[SR-Users] Server-side NAT traversal with Kamailio
abalashov at evaristesys.com
Mon May 7 20:27:25 CEST 2018
Well, that's not entirely true. Outbound requires significant server-side support.
I just don't see it as adding much to NAT traversal, which works just fine without it. Outbound's value is really in solving a redundancy problem (through really Byzantine and bureaucratic means).
On May 7, 2018 9:29:26 AM EDT, Sergiu Pojoga <pojogas at gmail.com> wrote:
>On a second thought, SIP Outbound is client-side oriented, so never
>On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 8:49 AM, Sergiu Pojoga <pojogas at gmail.com>
>> Hi Alex,
>> Very thorough write up, as always. If only this article was available
>> time ago when I was putting up an edge proxy, would have saved me
>> frustration in figuring out all these NAT-related aspects and RFC
>> (although such an exercise helps understand the problem to its core).
>> What you may consider adding to your article is the option of the yet
>> so popular, but in my opinion the "future of NAT-traveral" practice
>> networks, which is the SIP Outbound mechanism.
>> Best regards,
>> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 7:24 AM, Alex Balashov
><abalashov at evaristesys.com>
>>> Recent repeated questions on this topic have inspired a blog post:
>>> This is a rough cut, and may be edited or expanded later.
>>> Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
>>> Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free)
>>> Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
>>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>>> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
Sent via mobile, please forgive typos and brevity.
More information about the sr-users