Hi, thanks for your answer.
The question was about, if the fix_nated_sdp() (in the example below) could maybe break something. I am sure, that the fix_nated_sdp() would work in "some" cases but I am not sure, if the function could break something: if (method==INVITE && has_sdp() && nat_uac_test(8)) fix_nated_sdp(3) and within the onreply route: if (status=~(180|183|200) && has_sdp() && nat_uac_test(8)) fix_nated_sdp(3) Or is there a better solution to fix these damend NAT scenarios? Best regards, Bernhard -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: kaiserbo...@googlemail.com [mailto:kaiserbo...@googlemail.com] Im Auftrag von Carsten Bock Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. Januar 2011 18:56 An: Bernhard Suttner Cc: sr-users@lists.sip-router.org Betreff: Re: [SR-Users] fix_nated_sdp() Hi Bernhard, have you checked the SDP which is going to and from the Freeswitch-Server? Is it modified? If yes: You may want to check your NAT-Firewall. A working (but not nice) solution might be to relay the RTP through an proxy in this case... If No: Verify the result of "nat_uac_test": Why is it returning "false"? Carsten 2011/1/25 Bernhard Suttner <bernhard.sutt...@winet.ch>: > Hi, > > someone has an idea? > > Thanks in advance! > > Best regards, > Bernhard > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org > [mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org] Im Auftrag von Bernhard Suttner > Gesendet: Montag, 24. Januar 2011 20:38 > An: sr-users@lists.sip-router.org > Betreff: [SR-Users] fix_nated_sdp() > > Hi, > > I have a question about the fix_nated_sdp() function. Different devices > (phones, pbxes, gateways) are using Kamailio as SBC. The SBC does t_relay() > the message to a pool of FreeSWITCH Servers. > > The scenario does work quite well but: > > if a call is initiated from one of the freeswitch server, pass it through > kamailio to the PBX and the PBX does have a forwarding back to kamailio and > in the end to freeswitch I have no audio because the PBX is behind a NAT and > uses private ip addresses in all the SDP of 200 OK and 183 Session Progress. > Therefore FreeSWITCH could not do the (very cool) RTP Auto-Adjustment (check > if IP in incoming packet is different to the IP in the SDP) to detect the > real IP address. > > Therefore I have to use fix_nated_sdp(). I am not sure, what this function > could break therefore I want to be very sure and use it only, if really > necessary. Test which User-Agent or Server the peer (in this example the PBX) > has, is not really possible because some devices does not send this header. > > What do you think about the follwoing pseudo code: > > if (method==INVITE && has_sdp() && nat_uac_test(8)) fix_nated_sdp(3) > > and within the onreply route: > > if (status=~(180|183|200) && has_sdp() && nat_uac_test(8)) fix_nated_sdp(3) > > Somebody has a better idea to handle this? What could go wrong? > > Thanks in advance. > > Best regards, > Bernhard Suttner > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Carsten Bock Schomburgstr. 80 22767 Hamburg Germany Mobile +49 179 2021244 Home +49 40 34927217 Büro (Verl) +49 5246 801427 Fax +49 40 34927218 mailto:cars...@bock.info _______________________________________________ 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
