While I may have misunderstood forwarding registrations, the questions asked were valid, and led to more questions. After asking some questions and realizing it needs more discussion, Robert graciously opened http://track.sipfoundry.org/browse/XECS-2432 (thanks Robert) which will be addressed in some fashion after 4.0 is released, which likely requires more discussion and input after 4.0 is completed.
At the same time I think your questions were answered by Scott. Thanks Scott. >>> "Scott Lawrence" <[email protected]> 04/05/09 1:14 PM >>> On Sun, 2009-04-05 at 10:14 -0500, voice wrote: > Hi Tony > > The second question is: If the proxy is behind firewall/NAT how do you > register "directly to the sipx proxy server". > > The first question was: This problem known from day one... why was a > decision made to have sipXbridge NOT "work like Ingate - which forwards > REGISTER"!! knowing that port 5060 is the gold standard. Ingate does not in fact _just_ forward REGISTER, but that's not the point. Using the proxy directly (as opposed to requiring all external traffic to go through sipXbridge) makes the architecture of both simpler and more focused on one mission. As I've said before, an ITSP that can't cope with a different port number is one that you'll have other problems with - get a better one - the good ones have no trouble at all with configuring a port other that 5060. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
