>>> Michael Scheidell <[email protected]> 01/27/11 4:29 PM >>> >> >>I would be willing to try again, as EVERY NOW AND THEN, level3 complains about my 'experimental installation'. >>I want to put up a HA/DR vmail/call fwd system in a different geographic location, but am afraid the port issue will come up again. >> >>oh, and I did offer $1000 to ezuce if they could provide a workaround.
I'm sure it offers no consolation, but we have several customers (including our personal corporate system) using VOIP.MS. We do not, and have never used any other translation than a plain port forward for inbound 5060 to translate to 5080. We use this same plain port forward for Voxitas (now appia) and Onecomm sip trunks (all of which must send the invite to port 5060). No layer 7 needed. In fact anytime we have a firewall with any kind of SIP ALG (which is a layer 7 gateway) we must disable it. Thats not say there are not providers that couldn't be adding this additional port info in the SIP header. But there are many people using a plain port translation with ITSP that require to send the invite to port 5060 without any Moh, transfer or other issues. I'd like to see a siptrace from your trunk. You should be able to see if they are specifying the port info sip header using sipviewer because sipviewer only shows the sip packet (layer 7 stuff) and does not show the actual TCP headers (layer 4) where the actual packet arrived on the port. -M </[email protected]><[email protected]> </[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
