Hello, I have the following question regarding FS profile setup: is it considered normal to only have one profile at all? (The server is not behind a NAT/firewall; LAN users have direct routes to it.) From what I gather from the sample configuration, it's pretty much possible to distinguish between authenticated ("our own") users and external SIP requests via the dialplan. Quoting, <extension name="check_auth" continue="true"> <condition field="${sip_authorized}" expression="^true$" break="never"> <anti-action application="respond" data="407"/> </condition> </extension> <extension name="transfer_to_default"> <condition> <action application="transfer" data="${destination_number} XML default"/> </condition> </extension> Basically, I'd like FS to accept all calls (internal and external alike) on 5060, and use 5070 for external providers we register with. To get the "internal" profile to work like that on 5060, I have to comment the "apply-inbound-acl" setting (sip_profiles/internal.xml), and disable auth checking (internal_auth_calls=false in vars.xml). Would that be the correct solution, or is that somehow considered "insecure"? According to internal.xml, all non-authenticated (without user_context defined) calls fall into the public context anyway, and having an "is the user authenticated?" check in the public context allows us to transfer the call to the correct dialplan—so what are the security risks then? Speaking of which, is there a point in having user_context defined for users who need the default context, if they can just be redirected to that context via check_auth extension of the public context? Thanks in advance. -- Kamigishi Rei KREI-RIPE