I'd like to setup a gateway with no registration (other end allows by IP). <include> <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"/> </gateway> </include> 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. Regards, Cliff