Re: [SR-Users] R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH

2014-09-29 Thread Richard Fuchs
On 09/29/14 13:03, Richard Fuchs wrote: > On 09/25/14 10:22, Frank Carmickle wrote: >> >> On Sep 25, 2014, at 10:09 AM, Marino Mileti > > wrote: >> >>> Because I've more than 1 client behind NAT (1,2,3 mobile phones) and I >>> would like to reach all of them in paral

Re: [SR-Users] R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH

2014-09-29 Thread Richard Fuchs
On 09/25/14 10:22, Frank Carmickle wrote: > > On Sep 25, 2014, at 10:09 AM, Marino Mileti > wrote: > >> Because I've more than 1 client behind NAT (1,2,3 mobile phones) and I would >> like to reach all of them in parallel mode. I can't use for all of them same >>

Re: [SR-Users] R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH

2014-09-25 Thread Frank Carmickle
On Sep 25, 2014, at 10:09 AM, Marino Mileti wrote: > Because I've more than 1 client behind NAT (1,2,3 mobile phones) and I would > like to reach all of them in parallel mode. I can't use for all of them same > ports because all mobile clients have early media (the receive video media > befor

[SR-Users] R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH

2014-09-25 Thread Marino Mileti
Because I've more than 1 client behind NAT (1,2,3 mobile phones) and I would like to reach all of them in parallel mode. I can't use for all of them same ports because all mobile clients have early media (the receive video media before they answer) So at the moment this scenario is not possible

[SR-Users] R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH

2014-09-23 Thread marino.mil...@alice.it
Because I've more than 1 client behind NAT (1,2,3 mobile phones) and I would like to reach all of them in parallel mode. I can't use for all of them same ports because all mobile clients have early media (the receive video media before they answer) So at the moment this scenario is not possible?