<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'>Gotcha, if I sort wireshark by source freeswitch sends 2 RTP packets and then a handful if ICMP errors, this pattern repeats for the entire call (2 voice packets and 5+ icmp errors). <br><br> 192.168.24.22 = freeswitch<br>192.168.21.4 = endpoint<br><br>ID Time Source Src Port Destination Dest Port <br>12 0.186121 192.168.24.22 27176 192.168.21.4 16752 RTP PT=ITU-T G.711 PCMU, SSRC=0x33CF6C8, Seq=5202, Time=240, Mark <br>13 0.186126 192.168.24.22 27176 192.168.21.4 16752 RTP PT=ITU-T G.711 PCMU, SSRC=0x33CF6C8, Seq=5202, Time=240, Mark <br>57 1.477101 192.168.24.22 16752 192.168.21.4 27176 ICMP Destination unreachable (Port unreachable)<br>92 2.467948 192.168.24.22 16752 192.168.21.4 27176 ICMP Destination unreachable (Port unreachable)<br>93 2.467949 192.168.24.22 16752 192.168.21.4 27176 ICMP Destination unreachable (Port unreachable)<br>194 5.465388 192.168.24.22 16752 192.168.21.4 27176 ICMP Destination unreachable (Port unreachable)<br><br><br>The ICMP erros have the ports reversed, is this normal ?<br><br>Thanks,<br>Dan-<br><hr id="zwchr"><b>From: </b>"Brian West" <brian@freeswitch.org><br><b>To: </b>"FreeSWITCH Users Help" <freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org><br><b>Sent: </b>Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:30:40 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [Freeswitch-users] calls ending with MEDIA_TIMEOUT<br><br>NO that would mean that it was sending RTP to that IP and the firewall returned and ICMP port unreachable.<br><br>/b<br><br>On Jul 21, 2010, at 8:43 AM, Dan wrote:<br><br>> I was able to pull the box out yesterday and try some load testing under tcpdump. It looks like under load freeswitch was trying to ping the far end RTP port which was failing:<br>> <br>> 57 1.477101 192.168.24.22 192.168.21.4 ICMP Destination unreachable (Port unreachable)<br>> <br>> I'm guessing this is part of auto nat detection? Is this a tunable option? I don't need stun/nat functionality at this point so I'm running freeswitch with the -nonat flag right now to see if its playing a part here. <br>> <br>> I have the tcpdump of a call if anyone is interested.<br>> <br>> Thanks<br>> Dan-<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>FreeSWITCH-users mailing list<br>FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org<br>http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users<br>UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users<br>http://www.freeswitch.org</div></body></html>