On 22.12.2014 14:58, Matthew Jordan wrote: [SNIP] > From what I can tell in your trace, the only aspect here that may be > incorrect is not applying the NAT'd IP address to the owner > information. That is, in an ideal world, the owner information would > match the IP address provided in the connection lines. Per RFC 4566, > section 5.2, we shouldn't be sending a local IP address in the owner > information, and it looks like we're still doing that here. [SNIP] > Again, however, it'd be good to know that this is actually causing a > problem before making an issue. Generally, most implementations don't > assign semantic meaning to the IP address in the owner line, as the > purpose of the owner field is to construct a globally unique > identifier for the session, not to determine where to send media to. > In fact, it is permissible in some situations to provide obfuscated IP > addresses in the owner field. Again, from RFC 4566 section 5.2: [SNIP]
In the meantime, I have tried to do some homework. I have made Asterisk bind to the main IP address of the box, and I have configured the local net and the external media address in the transport like that: [tr_wZCMk5MvC2ATNzAr] type = transport protocol = udp bind = 192.168.20.238 local_net = 192.168.20.0/24 local_net = 127.0.0.1/32 external_media_address = my.public.ip.address external_signaling_address = my.public.ip.address Note that Asterisk now is bound to 192.168.20.238 (this is another IP address than in my last messages). Interestingly, these changes had a subtle influence on when the communication goes wrong, compared to the situation I have described some days ago. Since the result is the same in the end (I still can't send fax documents), I won't go into the details here. At least, we can deduce that the wrong owner line is not the only problem (if it is a problem at all which I don't believe any more). For further analysis, I have let Wireshark create a call flow log which is here: http://www.omeganet.de/t38-call-flow-01.txt (sorry for the inconvenience, but the log is 41 kB, and the message size limit is 40 kB for this list). I suspect that the problem is indicated by the log lines which show "T38:T30 ind:no signal". I admit that I know nearly nothing about the details of fax protocols, so I hope somebody with appropriate knowledge is willing to take a look into the log and to tell me in simple words if these lines denote a normal situation or if they denote a problem. Thank you very much, Recursive -- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users