Klaus Darilion wrote: > Actually I would nat=yes always, even if clients are not behind NAT os > otherwise the clietn can put some garbage into the contact header (e.g. > IP address of an upstream provider) and influence routing.
No. There is a specific reason RFC 3261 says: "Registration creates bindings in a location service for a particular domain that associates an address-of-record URI with one or more contact addresses. Thus, when a proxy for that domain receives a request whose Request-URI matches the address-of-record, the proxy will forward the request to the contact addresses registered to that address-of-record." This gives the UAC the necessary level of control to determine how it is to be contacted. Imagine, for a example, a scenario in which incoming registrations are proxied further upstream for whatever reason - load balancer/distributor perhaps? - by an intermediate element. Do you really want to use that proximate hop's received IP address in place of the ultimate sending UAC's domain? -- Alex -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 _______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users