[Freeswitch-users] Update RTP Address On Re-Invite

Colin Morelli colin.morelli at gmail.com
Fri Jul 8 06:33:07 MSD 2016

Hey all,

Reviving this thread just to see if anyone has thoughts here?

I've tried digging through the source and can't seem to find where the
re-opening of auto_adjust happens during a re-invite. As an aside bug (I'll
report in JIRA) - it looks like the always_auto_adjust RTP bug results in
very choppy audio.

That said, I don't need always_auto_adjust, as I'm fine with sending a
re-invite when I need this to happen. It just doesn't seem to be working.
Is there something else that needs to be set or is this also a bug?


On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 9:34 PM Colin Morelli <colin.morelli at gmail.com>

> Is this the case even when the RTP IP in the SDP doesn't change? I'm
> seeing successful re-invites being processed with no auto adjust happening
> afterwards. I see:
> 2016-05-13 21:28:24.216684 [DEBUG] sofia.c:7614 Processing updated SDP
> Indicating that FS did receive the SDP in the re-invite but nothing else
> about RTP auto adjust afterwards. This is on FreeSWITCH Version
> 1.6.7-14-d38d065~64bit (-14-d38d065 64bit) running on Debian 8 x86_64.
> Thanks for the response.
> Best,
> Colin
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 9:14 PM Michael Jerris <mike at jerris.com> wrote:
>> we already re-open the auto adjust window on reinvite
>> On Friday, May 13, 2016, Colin Morelli <colin.morelli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I have mobile applications running behind NAT. When their reachability
>>> changes (and the device's local route updates), I want to automatically
>>> switch the RTP stream to the new address/port combination.
>>> I've tried using the RTP ALWAYS_AUTO_ADJUST bug, but that results in
>>> *very* choppy audio. I also don't really need it, as the only time I
>>> care to perform RTP auto-adjust is after an invite session. For this case I
>>> can safely assume that the client *will* send a re-invite when its
>>> address changes. Is there any way to perform RTP audio adjust only on a
>>> re-invite?
>>> Using STUN doesn't seem right for two reasons: 1) on its own it can't
>>> solve this problem (even if it determines the external IP, the port is
>>> still wrong). 2) it results in issues on FS "Invalid STUN/ICE packet
>>> received 20 bytes"
>>> Would appreciate any help.
>>> Best,
>>> Colin
>> _________________________________________________________________________
>> Professional FreeSWITCH Consulting Services:
>> consulting at freeswitch.org
>> http://www.freeswitchsolutions.com
>> Official FreeSWITCH Sites
>> http://www.freeswitch.org
>> http://confluence.freeswitch.org
>> http://www.cluecon.com
>> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
>> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
>> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
>> http://www.freeswitch.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20160708/57230d74/attachment.html 

Join us at ClueCon 2016 Aug 8-12, 2016
More information about the FreeSWITCH-users mailing list