Hi,
>Obviously I'm not a client guy, but I've been told not all clients have the >ability to set their sockets to do that, depending on the OS. > >> I think that's a bit network-centric viewpoint. I'm comfortable with >> leaving the NAT-traversal responsibility on the client. (which kind of >> gets to the root of the problem, which is NATs are client-server >> centric). Then some things (such as server's decision how to keep the >> connections alive) don't have to concern us. > >Ironically I'm also trying to let the client do it - by having it tell the >proxy "I'm smart enough to keep this connection alive by myself, if you're >smart enough to use >these mechanisms". I agree with Hadriel. The idea is to let the client do it, so that the proxy doesn't need to handle it, e.g. by providing short registration refresh timers etc in order to make sure the NAT bindings stay open. Regards, Christer _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
