>>> Tony Graziano >> When an invite comes from the provider and says the address and port >> "123.456.789.10:5080" and it needs to say instead >>"123.456.789.10:5060", its not the PACKET that needs to be translated or the >>address, its what is INSIDE the header, not >>the actual packet destination. This means something has to actually take the >>header message and rewrite it with the >>correct information. A simple PAT or NAT in a firewall is not going to be >>able to do this in any event.<[email protected]> 01/27/11 3:44 PM
Made this new thread. I'm interested in the scenario you point out here as I've never seen an second SBC required to translate 5060 to 5080 for sip trunking to work. Where do you see this scenario occur? A typical sip invite from an itsp to sipxbridge does not included the port for the invite in the sip header. Thats why a simple port forward/nat works without the need for an SBC outside of sipxbridge. The invite does not include that info typically. For example, here is an example taken from his packet trace as an example of a normal invite. INVITE sip:[email protected] SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 172.30.216.62:5070;branch=z9hG4bK4o0sud00boih8p0ig5s1.1 From: "WIRELESS CALLER" <sip:[email protected];user=phone>;tag=1444716082-1296146110120- To: "DSI HOLDING DSI TEST ENTERPRISE" <sip:[email protected]> Call-ID: [email protected] CSeq: 606735189 INVITE Contact: <sip:[email protected]:5070;transport=udp> Allow: ACK,BYE,CANCEL,INFO,INVITE,OPTIONS,PRACK,REFER,NOTIFY Accept: multipart/mixed,application/media_control+xml,application/sdp Supported: Max-Forwards: 69 Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: 209 Nowhere in the actual SIP info is the port where sipxbridge received the info. The sip header does include where we respond with our packets...in this case </[email protected]>Contact: <sip:[email protected]:5070 but that is where sipxbridge will send responses too...and as such the 5080/5060 is not related. <[email protected]> A simple port forward/NAT to translate the packet destination from 5060 to 5080 works fine for sip trunking becuase the port info is just that...not in the sip header. Do you see invites from a certain ITSP that puts the destination port in the packet? I wonder how many providers do this? We only use about 4 or 5 providers will all are installs but have not seen this before. </[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
