Both uPnP and NAT-PMP are rather useless: they cannot handle multiple layers of NAT (eg. NAT at home, plus NAT at ISP). ICE/STUN can.
I've heard somewhere that Asterisk 1.6 does have a MIDCOM or some similar NAT traversal protocol. But relatively few NAT devices support these protocols. Why bother? NAT hole punching techniques used by ICE/STUN works through almost all NATs, and the rest can be solved using TURN. Bye Damjan > I don't recall seeing anything anywhere (while compiling, on the Wiki, > etc) that would suggest that FreeSWITCH does uPnP (or NAT-PMP for that > matter; this question is without regard to NAT Traversal religion) for > port mapping. Is this a correct assumption? > > Does anyone know if Asterisk does do uPnP or NAT-PMP to map incoming > ports to itself? I haven't touched Asterisk in a couple years so... > > This is mostly just my idle curiosity working, triggered by another > question asked on the list... > > thanks, > eric > > > _______________________________________________ > Freeswitch-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ Freeswitch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
