> >Scott Lawrence wrote: >> On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 07:41 -0400, Martin Steinmann wrote: >>> On the Internet Calling screen sipXbridge is offered as one of the >>> possible choices for an SBC. Internet Calling allows the routing of >>> SIP URI dialed "calls" through an SBC from the inside network to the >>> Internet. E.g. if a user dials a call to [EMAIL PROTECTED], then that >>> call is routed throiugh one of the specified SBCs in order to receive >>> proper NAT handling and be able to pass the firewall. >>> >>> >>> >>> Can sipXbridge do that? >> >> With the new NAT compensation feature, no SBC is needed for it. >> > >Are you saying that when NAT traversal is enabled I do not have to >configure and enable Internet Calling? >Or are you saying that Internet Calling (as in: "routing SIP urls calls >through specific SBCs") is not needed at all? > >BTW: I asked Bob about it and I think he said Internet Calling might still >be needed (I might have misunderstood something but I think he mentioned >other capabilities of SIP aware firewalls that our NAT compensation does >not handle). > >I'd like to know what would be the typical usage patterns here so that we >can design UI that matches it. >D. >
What I am asking is whether sipXbridge can serve as an SBC routing URI dialed calls to any destination and not just an ITSP that has been configured. Having sipXbridge as a possible option in the drop-down to select an SBC suggests that this works --martin _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
