Most likely these are going to be basically the same. The difference would be if the far end performs an auth challenge. With the gateway you are prepared to respond to the challenge w/ proper SIP creds.

-MC

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Colin Mason <cmason@frontiernetworks.ca> wrote:

Hello,

 

I am using FreeSWITCH as a SIP router to route calls through a few different private networks without answering the call. It gets answered downstream from my servers. I was wondering if there was a functionality difference between:

 

<action application="bridge" data="sofia/gateway/opensips_toronto/$1"/>

 

And

 

<action application="bridge" data="sofia/mpls/$1@10.10.10.10:5060"/>

 

 

 

My gateway is defined as follows

 

<include>

    <gateway name="opensips_toronto">

      <param name="proxy" value="10.10.10.10:5060"/>

      <param name="register" value="false"/>

    </gateway>

</include>

 

 

Thanks,

 

Colin


_________________________________________________________________________
Professional FreeSWITCH Consulting Services:
consulting@freeswitch.org
http://www.freeswitchsolutions.com

FreeSWITCH-powered IP PBX: The CudaTel Communication Server
http://www.cudatel.com

Official FreeSWITCH Sites
http://www.freeswitch.org
http://wiki.freeswitch.org
http://www.cluecon.com

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




--
Michael S Collins
Twitter: @mercutioviz
http://www.FreeSWITCH.org
http://www.ClueCon.com
http://www.OSTAG.org