Dingaling: using a hostname instead of stun for rtp
Hi! I have a hostname set in vars.conf.xml for the parameters external_rtp_ip and the external_sip_ip instead of the usual stun. I found that stun was timing out and was causing some problems. And as I have a hostname, it makes sense to use that instead of relying on stun. However, when I use Dingaling, I see the following error message in the dl_debug tracing: <iq to="<FS_EMAIL>@gmail.com/gtalk77BBCB94" id="344" type="error" from="<email1>@gmail.com/Talk.v10488E8134A"> <ses:session type="candidates" id="3697758817" initiator=""<email1>@gmail.com/Talk.v10488D9134A" xmlns:ses="http://www.google.com/session"> <ses:candidate name="rtp" address="host:<hostname>" port="30710" username="nVv7FqwNyWbiMuTt" password="nVv7BqwQyVbiMuTt" preference="1.0" protocol="udp" type="local" network="0" generation="0"></ses:candidate> </ses:session> <error type="modify"> <sta:bad-request xmlns:sta="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-stanzas"></sta:bad-request> <sta:text xml:lang="en" xmlns:sta="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-stanzas">candidate has address of zero</sta:text> </error> </iq> Is Gtalk expecting an address in this field '<ses:candidate name="rtp" address="host:<hostname>"' instead of a hostname? Or should FS be sending the hostname only and not host:hostname? Thanks!
I don't think mod_dingaling will do a lookup for host: like sofia will as it doesn't have the code for that last I checked... I could be wrong but I don't recall it doing that. /b On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:02 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith wrote:
I have a hostname set in vars.conf.xml for the parameters external_rtp_ip and the external_sip_ip instead of the usual stun. I found that stun was timing out and was causing some problems. And as I have a hostname, it makes sense to use that instead of relying on stun.
Thanks Brian. Is this something that is planned to be implemented? The workaround is to set the stun server also in the dingaling configuration, but as I said, for some reason the stun times for me out occasionally with dingaling. Thanks! On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Brian West <brian@freeswitch.org> wrote:
I don't think mod_dingaling will do a lookup for host: like sofia will as it doesn't have the code for that last I checked... I could be wrong but I don't recall it doing that.
/b
On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:02 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith wrote:
I have a hostname set in vars.conf.xml for the parameters external_rtp_ip and the external_sip_ip instead of the usual stun. I found that stun was timing out and was causing some problems. And as I have a hostname, it makes sense to use that instead of relying on stun.
_______________________________________________ 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
If you setup your own stun server it wouldn't do that.... But the hostlookup only solves half the problem .. getting the external IP vs poking holes for RTP which is what stun will do. /b On Oct 15, 2009, at 10:35 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith wrote:
Thanks Brian. Is this something that is planned to be implemented? The workaround is to set the stun server also in the dingaling configuration, but as I said, for some reason the stun times for me out occasionally with dingaling.
Thanks!
If you don't have working stun, jingle is not going to work very well. It is a required part of the protocol. You need to be able to determine your external ports for media on each call, using a host name will not do this for you. Mike On Oct 16, 2009, at 10:48 AM, Brian West wrote:
If you setup your own stun server it wouldn't do that.... But the hostlookup only solves half the problem .. getting the external IP vs poking holes for RTP which is what stun will do.
/b
On Oct 15, 2009, at 10:35 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith wrote:
Thanks Brian. Is this something that is planned to be implemented? The workaround is to set the stun server also in the dingaling configuration, but as I said, for some reason the stun times for me out occasionally with dingaling.
Thanks!
Thanks for the response Mike and Brian. Using stun is not a problem and I have it working okay now. Is there something different in the implementation of the stun lookup between dingaling and sofia? I normally use stun.freeswitch.org and sofia never had a problem. It doesn't matter which stun server I use with dingaling (I have tried with numerous servers) and the same thing seems to happen. The first stun lookup fails with a timeout (on the first inbound call), and then if another dingaling call is tried directly, the second stun lookup works. I noticed a similar behaviour by issuing the stun command from fs_cli Thanks On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Michael Jerris <mike@jerris.com> wrote:
If you don't have working stun, jingle is not going to work very well. It is a required part of the protocol. You need to be able to determine your external ports for media on each call, using a host name will not do this for you.
Mike
On Oct 16, 2009, at 10:48 AM, Brian West wrote:
If you setup your own stun server it wouldn't do that.... But the hostlookup only solves half the problem .. getting the external IP vs poking holes for RTP which is what stun will do.
/b
On Oct 15, 2009, at 10:35 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith wrote:
Thanks Brian. Is this something that is planned to be implemented? The workaround is to set the stun server also in the dingaling configuration, but as I said, for some reason the stun times for me out occasionally with dingaling.
Thanks!
_______________________________________________ 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
They all use the same core API. I suspect since our stun server is just a cname to many public services out there you're just thinking its dingaling related but its really not... /b On Oct 17, 2009, at 7:10 PM, Mark Campbell-Smith wrote:
I noticed a similar behaviour by issuing the stun command from fs_cli
Thanks
participants (3)
-
Brian West
-
Mark Campbell-Smith
-
Michael Jerris