2010/4/23 Jesus Rodriguez <jes...@voztele.com>: > Hola Iñaki, > > >> Hi, I must deal with a B2BUA which keeps the original SDP unchanged >> except the fact that it removes the "a=nortpproxy:yes" line added by >> RtpProxy. >> The B2BUA intercommunicates two Kamailio, both forcing its own RtpProxy >> server. >> >> I've not tested it again but expect there will be no RTP as each >> RtpProxy will wait for RTP coming from the other. Am I right? >> Of course I could force RtpProxy just in NAT cases and so, but I >> prefer to force it always so the clients of each Kamailio can >> configure QoS for the media addresses (different in each server). Is >> there some workaround for it? > > > You can use "-f" with force_rtp_proxy() : > > f - instructs nathelper to ignore marks inserted by another nathelper in > transit to indicate that the session is already goes through another proxy. > Allows creating chain of proxies.
But the "problem" is that the SDP doesn't contain a=nortpproxy:yes" as the B2BUA removed it. Then I don't need "-f" :) But my question is, will be there media between both RtpProxies then? Well, after reading "Allows creating chain of proxies" it seems that it should be :) >> In the other hand: is it possible two different Kamailio's to share >> the same RtpProxy server? I've never tryied it. If it's valid, would >> it solve the B2BUA issue? (I don't think so as there are still >> different media sessions created by different kamailio instances). > > > Yes, you can share the same rtpproxy with different Kamailios. Great. Thanks a lot. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <i...@aliax.net> _______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
