"Raj Mathur (राज माथुर)" writes:
> Precisely. In fact, if a packet from 192.168.2.n is received on /any/
> interface, the response will always go out from the 192.168.2.X
> interface. (Barring some weird routing/iptables configuration, of
> course.)
This is only the case for TCP, because TC
"Kevin P. Fleming" writes:
> I've just looked into this a bit, and I don't see how using connect()
> would actually solve the problem. If we receive a UDP datagram from a
> SIP endpoint, we could use socket() and connect() to create a socket
> specifically for sending to (and receiving from) that
On Thursday 12 Jul 2012, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> On 07/11/2012 11:36 PM, Jeff LaCoursiere wrote:
> > This does exhibit the problem though. Your OS stack assumes one of
> > those addresses - the first identified interface? - is the one that
> > all replies will appear to come from. So phones on
On 07/12/2012 03:53 PM, Benny Amorsen wrote:
chan_sip does have the ability to use connect()-ed sockets for dialogs
now, since that is required for TCP, TLS and WebSocket support. It
wouldn't be a huge leap to use them for UDP as well, if that was
beneficial.
It would be greatly appreciated :)
"Kevin P. Fleming" writes:
> I must be missing something. If a phone sends a UDP packet to
> 192.168.1.1, how does that get routed to (arrive at) the 10.0.2.1
> interface on the Asterisk server?
The easiest way is that the Asterisk server itself is the router. Phones
on 10.0.2.0/24 have 10.0.2.1
On 07/12/2012 12:38 PM, Freddi Hansen wrote:
We have since Asterisk 1.2 been using a configuration with 6 NIC's
bonding to 3 networks, one public internet and 2 private networks.
Routing calls between networks and having phones on all 3 networks is no
problem.
There is one case though where we
> I must be missing something. If a phone sends a UDP packet to
> 192.168.1.1, how does that get routed to (arrive at) the 10.0.2.1
> interface on the Asterisk server? The only way I can imagine that
> happening is if a router in between the phone and the server has been
> told that 192.168.1.
On 07/12/2012 09:19 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote:
"Kevin P. Fleming" writes:
That's quite interesting; can you describe a scenario where this
occurs?
Imagine you have a server with two interfaces, eth0 with 192.168.1.1/24
and eth1 with 10.0.2.1/24. Further imagine that you wish to be able to
move
On 07/11/2012 11:36 PM, Jeff LaCoursiere wrote:
This does exhibit the problem though. Your OS stack assumes one of
those addresses - the first identified interface? - is the one that all
replies will appear to come from. So phones on the 192.168.2.0/24
network that try to register get replies
On 07/12/2012 09:19 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote:
"Kevin P. Fleming" writes:
That's quite interesting; can you describe a scenario where this occurs?
Imagine you have a server with two interfaces, eth0 with 192.168.1.1/24
and eth1 with 10.0.2.1/24. Further imagine that you wish to be able to
move
"Kevin P. Fleming" writes:
> That's quite interesting; can you describe a scenario where this occurs?
Imagine you have a server with two interfaces, eth0 with 192.168.1.1/24
and eth1 with 10.0.2.1/24. Further imagine that you wish to be able to
move phones between the networks without changing t
Similar problem
On 12/07/2012, at 4:36 PM, Jeff LaCoursiere wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 15:49 +1200, Alec Davis wrote:
>> I've seen similar.
>>
>> We tried 4 interfaces. On 4 lans, are these considered to be overlapping?
>> 192.168.1.1
>> 192.168.2.1
>> 192.168.3.1
>> 192.168.4.1
>>
>
Runnin
erisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of
> > Kevin P. Fleming
> > Sent: Thursday, 12 July 2012 2:28 a.m.
> > To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
> > Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] chan_sip sending from wrong
> > source address when multiple interfaces are used
&
n...@lists.digium.com
> [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of
> Kevin P. Fleming
> Sent: Thursday, 12 July 2012 2:28 a.m.
> To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
> Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] chan_sip sending from wrong
> source address when multiple interfaces are u
On 07/11/2012 07:51 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
10 jul 2012 kl. 20:50 skrev Kevin P. Fleming:
On 07/10/2012 03:24 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
The Asterisk SIP channel has no knowledge about interfaces and can't
bind to a specific interface for communication. In fact, it's a well known
bug
15 matches
Mail list logo
