On Monday 11 February 2008 13:55:35 Ali Jawad wrote:
> Dear Iñaki
>
> Sorry for the phrasing, yes I meant in case of symmetric NAT would
> mediaproxy solve the natting problem. I got the main idea, thanks a lot for
> your help
Yes, RTP/MediaProxy solution works with symmetric NAT ;)
--
Iñaki Ba
, February 11, 2008 2:27 PM
To: users@lists.openser.org
Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] OpenSer and NAT
On Monday 11 February 2008 13:04:35 Ali Jawad wrote:
> Dear Iñaki
>
> Thanks for your quick reply, you have stated that STUN is transparent and
> once applied OpenSER modules wont de
On Monday 11 February 2008 13:04:35 Ali Jawad wrote:
> Dear Iñaki
>
> Thanks for your quick reply, you have stated that STUN is transparent and
> once applied OpenSER modules wont detect NAT and therefore wont act upon
> the packets. You also said that both solution can work together.
> Let's
>
e the proxy module of openser would kick in
and start acting right ?
Thx
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Iñaki Baz
Castillo
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 1:56 PM
To: users@lists.openser.org
Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] OpenSer and NA
On Monday 11 February 2008 12:46:17 Ali Jawad wrote:
> Hi All
>
>
>
> I was wondering about the rtpproxy and mediaproxy modules, if I do use
> either of them to allow clients behind NAT to do VOIP calls does that
> mean that I do not need to use a STUN server anymore ?
>
> Or should I use both a ST
Hi All
I was wondering about the rtpproxy and mediaproxy modules, if I do use
either of them to allow clients behind NAT to do VOIP calls does that
mean that I do not need to use a STUN server anymore ?
Or should I use both a STUN server and the rtp proxy ?
What would provide the best solu
