You're right, all that verbose book-learnin' and complex protocol implementations definitely don't belong together.
Steve Totaro wrote: > What is Asterisk designed to be? A PBX. (yes that is a period) That question will fetch many answers depending on who you're talking to. It is used for a great many things in larger systems. I think you know that. But, even assuming a straightforward PBX application is all it's good for, it still participates in the model outlined by the RFC. So, once again, it's important to understand the model holistically before you change how and when it's followed. I have a customer who uses Asterisk as a PBX but with an outboard registrar. Your recommended behaviour would break the platform unless they took the time to school themselves on the 'nat' option, why Asterisk does funky and nonstandard things with peer reachability by default, and changed all their peers to nat=no. People use Asterisk's SIP stack because it's a SIP stack out of the box, not a convenient-for-Steve-out-of-the-box or tailored-to-Alex-out-of-the-box stack. -- 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