On 03.12.2012, at 13:21, Juha Heinanen wrote:
>> However, I have a patch which is not yet ported to master, but will be
>> shortly, which allows to define signaling-only as well as media-only
>> interfaces. This would allow you to combine IPv6 signaling with IPv4
>> media and vice-versa.
> 
> that would suit me better, because then all sip traffic between my sip
> proxy and sems could always use ipv4 no matter what ip version is used
> by media.
> 

Should be committed in the next days (up to 2 weeks), as I am currently 
integrating lots of code we have here into master right now.

>> But this means that you will have to specify the
>> outbound interface for media explicitly, which does not really allow
>> for using one or the other depending on what is in the SDP...
>> 
>> Would that fit your purpose?
> 
> yes it would, provided that i would know how to specify media interface
> explicitly.
> 

This done in the SBC profiles. It is a simple parameter. You can specify it for 
either (or both) side. 

>> If not, I might find some time to implement automatic media interface
>> determination based on what is in the SDP. I think that should fix
>> your scenario.
> 
> that would, of course, be the simplest solution from user's point of
> view.  but i can live with the config that i showed in above.  it just
> means that i need to add one more (local) listen ipv6 address to my sip
> proxy.
> 
> by the way, cisco ios gateways implement ANAT (rfc 4091), which allows
> sdp stream contains both ipv4 and ipv6 media address.  that would be
> useful in sems outbound calls too.
> 

Yes, indeed. In the RFC it says: "obsoleted by RFC5245 (ICE)". Do you think I 
could still consider it as relevant, or just as legacy?

-Raphael.

> -- juha

_______________________________________________
Semsdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/semsdev

Reply via email to