Hey all, I created a bug a little while ago for an issue I was having with STUN binding responses during ICE negotiations on re-invites - https://freeswitch.org/jira/browse/FS-9711 I'm trying to work on the issue now (assuming others agree it's an issue), but I was hoping to hear from the community (and the FS folks) on how it's expected to/desired to work. The brief gist is that it seems to be possible for FS to have a disagreement between the remote RTP address, and the remote address it expects to receive STUN binding requests from (more details and logs can be found on the ticket). Assuming this doesn't end up being solely my issue (I don't think it is but I'm not 100% confident), would you expect that FS: 1. Trust the RTP address, and only send STUN binding responses to that - this is the current behavior, which means I just need to figure out why FS can sometimes end up in a state where it doesn't send STUN binding responses to the address it's receiving and sending RTP from/to. 2. Trust the STUN binding request, and update the remote RTP address to the one that STUN bindings are received from. If anyone has inputs/preferences, would be great to hear - a lot of this is still somewhat new to me. Would also appreciate assistance if anyone can. Thanks in advance, Colin P.S. - To the FS folks, I assumed this conversation was safe to have in the mailing list since the bug is reported with info separately and I'm looking for community input, but if you'd prefer this be in JIRA feel free to let me know.