Yes, for sure. As long as the transport is UDP based, the RTPProxy would just work. The change should be trivial, you can get it fixed locally, test and then open a pull request against opensips repo.
-Max On Thu., Apr. 2, 2020, 11:43 a.m. Robert Dyck, <rob.d...@telus.net> wrote: > Regarding opensips-3.0 > > Use case - webrtc client behind NAT > > > > The rtpproxy module emitted the error message "can't extract media port > from the message" ( by the way, very misleading ). In reality > extract_mediainfo fails because it could not find a supported payload type > in the media description. The payload type in question is > "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF". > > > > RFC 5764 section 8 introduces four more RTP types. > > DCCP/TLS/RTP/SAVP and SAVPF > > UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP and SAVPF > > > > Should rtpproxy.c be extended to support these additional RTP types? > > > > Thank you, Rob > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.opensips.org > http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
