Iñaki Baz Castillo writes: > Forget the two ob proxies if you want. The rest of the specification > is the best answer for NAT and TCP/TLS, much better than the > half-solutions we use today (those that makes the registrar to mantain > 40 bindings for the same AoR when the device is a movile using SIP > over TCP and reconnects every few minutes).
i don't have anything against that when ua registers it tells its unique id so that registrar can discard the old ones. what i was trying to say that outbound does not bring any help to implementing redundant sip infrastructure, where two active proxies could have worked together each with its own ip address. > What are you proposing then Juha? not implementing RFC 5626 and > continuing with custom solutions that don't work well? continuing with > Contact rewritting? No please. what comes to nat traversal, what are the problems with contact rewriting? so far it has worked quite well for me. -- juha _______________________________________________ sr-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
