On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Dale Worley<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 15:52 -0400, M. Ranganathan wrote:
>> If you have two systems behind NATs each with a domain name
>> sixp.example.local ( perfectly legal ) and you want to federate them
>> in the manner you are describing but without a B2BUA, will one system
>> not ge confused by the From header of the other?
>
> If you have two systems that can communicate with each other, they must
> have different SIP domains.  Otherwise URIs don't have unambiguous
> meanings.
>
> Dale


In this case, I am suggesting that the systems do not route requests
directly to each other but that they go through a back to back user
agent to re-write the request.  If I go through a Back to Back user
agent, I can always have these B2BuAs do the necessary
transformations.


Mechanistically it would work as follows:

When sipxbridge sees a request bound from system A to system B it
locate the " ITSP record " for system B based on the request URI and
make the necessary transformations to the request to send it to system
B.

It would attach a Route header to send the request to system B.


What would be the issue with that?

Ranga


>
>
>



-- 
M. Ranganathan
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list [email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/

Reply via email to