I also forgot to mention that that the nf_nat_sip module in Linux replaces the STUN's server role pretty well On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 6:39 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
The SIP UA only needs to be configured to use NAT in this case. The FS Server does not need any configuration in this case.
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Narendra Sirugudi <nsirugudi@gmail.com> wrote:
Just in case my diagram got bungled: The use case is: Freeswitch in the public network, with a SIP UA in a private network talking to Freeswitch across a NAT Server. --naren On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Narendra Sirugudi <nsirugudi@gmail.com> wrote:
__________________________ | | |________ ____|_____ ___________ || | | | 74.1.1.1 74.1.1.2 | | || SIP UA |---------------------| NAT Server|------------------------------------------| Freeswitch | ||________|10.10.10.10 |__________| Public Network |___________| | | 74.1.1.0 | Private Network 10.10.10.0 | |__________________________|
Hi,
In the above topology, the typical issue one faces is that the SDP(rtp) IP&port in SIP invite sent from the SIP UA to Freeswitch will contain the private Ip address of the SIP UA.
Assuming source NAT, the typical solution is to use a STUN server in the public network, which will help the SIP UA to discover the public IP&port (for its private IP&port). The UA then sends the Invite with the SDP(RTP) IP&port set to the discovered public IP&port. (I believe Freeswitch does not have a STUN server within itself.)
But suppose that we do not want to use the STUN solution. Does Freeswitch itself offer any solutions in this case ?
thanks, --naren
_______________________________________________ Join us at ClueCon 2011, Aug 9-11, Chicago http://www.cluecon.com 877-7-4ACLUE
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org