On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 11:18 AM Dan Cropp <d...@amtelco.com> wrote: > Thank you Joshua. >
<snip> > > > Going back to your idea of the ice_host_candidates. (Again, apologize for > my ignorance on networking). > > Do I understand correctly? We could use this formula for systems that have > no one accessing the (where 192.168.1.10 is the internal IP) and 1.2.3.4 is > the NAT’s public IP for Asterisk? > > > > 192.168.1.10 => 1.2.3.4,include_local_address > > > > Using this, would we no longer need the stunaddr configured? > You don't need the include_local_address option but otherwise yes. This will cause the ICE host candidates to be 1.2.3.4 instead of the local IP address 192.168.1.10 removing the need to use STUN to discover the public IP address. -- Joshua C. Colp Asterisk Project Lead Sangoma Technologies Check us out at www.sangoma.com and www.asterisk.org
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- Check out the new Asterisk community forum at: https://community.asterisk.org/ New to Asterisk? Start here: https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Getting+Started asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
