Browsing through the developers documentation and 1.4 source, I see
references to STUN in the code and documentation.
Does 1.4 have support for STUN, if so how is it configured?
Regards,
David
___
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
STUN requires 2 NIC interfaces on the machine running the server right? And
both interfaces need seperate public IP's right? 'And' the phones/ATA's need
to support STUN right? I don't think the Cisco phones support STUN.
-Matthew
- Original Message -
From: Brian Wilkins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Non-Commercial Discussion
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 9:51 AM
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] STUN and Asterisk? (Was: SER is a better NAT
solution?)
STUN requires 2 NIC interfaces on the machine running the server right?
And
both interfaces need seperate public IP's right
Sure they do. I have a bunch of Cisco phones that support STUN.
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 03:51 pm, Matthew Boehm wrote:
STUN requires 2 NIC interfaces on the machine running the server right? And
both interfaces need seperate public IP's right? 'And' the phones/ATA's
need to support STUN
Matthew Boehm wrote:
STUN requires 2 NIC interfaces on the machine running the server right?
And both interfaces need seperate public IP's right? '
Why ever for?
I realize that in order to set up a STUN server you need a public IP,
but why two of them and why two different interfaces?
Dazed and
]
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] STUN and Asterisk? (Was: SER is a better
NATsolution?)
Matthew Boehm wrote:
STUN requires 2 NIC interfaces on the machine running the server right
OK, I've breifly looked at STUN and what it is and can do.
First off it is NOT a way to punch UDP through a firewall.
STUN offers a method to determine the firewall environment
and find out just what is out there. But leaves it to
Asterisk to determine what to do.
The way it could be used within
Chris,
snip
OK, I've breifly looked at STUN and what it is and can do.
First off it is NOT a way to punch UDP through a firewall.
snip
Bottom line: STUN could save the user much configuration
hassel but does noting that a very knowagable person could
not figure out and then put into a
