Alex Balashov schrieb: > Klaus Darilion wrote: > >> Of course we know that we should implement RFC conform. But RFC 3261 has >> ignored the fact that the Internet is full of NATs and standard conform >> implementations can not work. This in the case of SIP it necessary to >> break the RFC. > > By default? > > NAT itself is a hack; therefore, I would think that NAT traversal > assistance should be enabled when NAT is used. Why would we presume NAT > and implement behaviour that is only desirable under NAT as a default?
Because NAT is the default. At least in Austria - most customers get a NAT router with their DSL Account. klaus _______________________________________________ -- 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
