[Freeswitch-users] Implications of using -nonat

[curriegrad2004]

I've submitted a patch for that :P

On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Bzzz <lazyvirus at gmx.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 09:41:32 -0700
> curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There aren't any implications. The -nonat switch just simply tells
>> FreeSWITCH to discover for an UPnP enabled NAT gateway so it can
>> forward ports dynamically via that API. If you choose to open up
>> ports the manual way then having that -nonat switch enabled
>> doesn't make much of a difference.
>
> My bad: too much time w/o touching FS (but very bad name too,
> noupnpnat would have been a lot more logical:(
>
> JY
> --
> <Strasph> If I die in 5 minutes, what do you wanna tell me ?
> <Decibel> "What's your root password?"
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Professional FreeSWITCH Consulting Services:
> consulting at freeswitch.org
> http://www.freeswitchsolutions.com
>
> 
> 
>
> Official FreeSWITCH Sites
> http://www.freeswitch.org
> http://wiki.freeswitch.org
> http://www.cluecon.com
>
> Join Us At ClueCon - Aug 7-9, 2012
>
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
> http://www.freeswitch.org