[Freeswitch-users] Gateway with no registration
mitch.capper at gmail.com
Wed Feb 9 23:32:26 MSK 2011
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Cliff Wells <cliff at develix.com> wrote:
> I'd like to setup a gateway with no registration (other end allows by
> <gateway name="outbound">
> <param name="username" value="none"/>
> <param name="password" value="none"/>
> <param name="proxy" value="x.x.x.x"/>
> <param name="register-transport" value="udp"/>
> <param name="retry-seconds" value="30"/>
> <param name="caller-id-in-from" value="true"/>
> As I understand it, the username and password shouldn't matter since
> registration is challenge/auth.
> What happens is I get a 403 when FreeSWITCH attempts to register (before
> any calls are placed), so FreeSWITCH has the gateway marked as
> FAIL_WAIT. Is this proof the other end is requiring registration? Or
> is FS expecting a challenge, getting none and marking the gateway down?
> Most of the solutions I've seen for this type of setup involve using a
> dialplan rather than a gateway, but my dialplans are served via
> mod_xml_curl and expect a functional gateway named "outbound" on the FS
> box. I'd rather not clutter up the xml dialplans with a bunch of
> special cases, so a named gateway is preferred.
> The problem certainly may lie on the other end (I don't have control of
> that system), but I'm not sure how to verify that.
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the FreeSWITCH-users