Re: [SR-Users] NatHelper - Received adding on Contact header

2016-10-03 Thread ycaner
Hello;     Our goal is 100k subscriber and i know that Asterisk cannot handle 3k subscriber that sending options to keep open ports. So this situation is afraid of me. Yeah ,You re right, dont trust endpoints. I think UAc keep-alive mechanism

Re: [SR-Users] NatHelper - Received adding on Contact header

2016-10-03 Thread Daniel Tryba
On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 03:35:59AM -0700, ycaner wrote: > it is simple way to solve this and it is softphone product problem. If i did > configuration as you said , it consumes so much socket , CPU and etc. in > future. I can't imagine this will be a significant amount of cpu/traffic. I can only s

Re: [SR-Users] NatHelper - Received adding on Contact header

2016-10-03 Thread ycaner
it is simple way to solve this and it is softphone product problem. If i did configuration as you said , it consumes so much socket , CPU and etc. in future. I wonder that is there a something about it on ietf or protocol flows. I think it is wrong. What do you think about it. Thanks for reply

Re: [SR-Users] NatHelper - Received adding on Contact header

2016-10-03 Thread Daniel Tryba
On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 12:22:22PM +0300, Yasin CANER wrote: >     When i have a look ietf3261 , i couldnt find any thing this flow. Do you > have any idea about it? >      > I am looking forward to your suggestions. It is simple, never trust the endpoint and always assume there is NAT or a statef

[SR-Users] NatHelper - Received adding on Contact header

2016-10-03 Thread Yasin CANER
Hello;      When I was testing on NatHelper , i  realized that Some Kind of Softphones can use "received" param on Contact for re-register request.     When re-registartion ,it uses received parameter IP on Contact so that Kamailio cannot understand