>> One of the things that was requested at the start of the outbound work >> in >> Kamailio was the ability to "force" outbound even when a UA does not >> support it and to be able to use the outbound flow tokens for NAT >> traversal instead of contact aliasing on "single server" >> configurations. > > fine IF there is some advantage in putting the information in rr header > instead of contact header. >
The argument that was presented was that putting the information in the rr header is more aligned with published standards. I have come across a number of devices at interconnects that incorrectly strip parameters that they do not recognise from the Contact-URI. While this is clearly incorrect behaviour on their part getting operators and vendors to fix their equipment is not always possible. As I said, I do not have a need for this myself as I plan to use separate edge proxies and registrars - but I can see where the requirement came from. >> To my mind this means we need to double-RR when there is just a single >> proxy/registrar in use. It also means that, when there is a single >> proxy/registrar and the Path extension would not normally be used, we >> still need to do something to get the flow tokens (userinfo part of the >> Path-URI) into the location table so that they can be used for NAT >> traversal. > > sounds much more complicated than contact aliasing. > Indeed. But I can see where it is sometimes needed. Peter -- Peter Dunkley Technical Director Crocodile RCS Ltd _______________________________________________ sr-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
