On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 3:00 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla <[email protected]> wrote:
> By changing contact addresses to kamailio ip, you lose the routing > information of the call. The proxy should leave the contact address as > it is (eventually updating for nat traversal purposes) and do record > routing to ensure that requests within dialog come through proxy as well. > Makes sense. My goal is not to hide internal topology-- I'm just trying to make the most compatible platform. A Contact with an unreachable domain felt wrong. Without using kam to modify the packets, kam forwards/sends to my sip provider: > INVITE sip:[email protected]:5060;transport=UDP SIP/2.0. > Record-Route: <sip:<KAM_PUB_ADDR>;lr;ftag=BT0Fm09r5mcpK;did=ee9.a235;nat=yes>. > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP <KAM_PUB_ADDR>:5060;branch=z8hG4bK29ea.49cb328da4d0bb2e14f5c1858de9c558.0. > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP <UAS_PRIV_ADDR>;rport=5060;branch=z8hG4bKp46Qc44j2DX4a. > Contact: <sip:<UAS_PRIV_ADDR>:5060>. > [...] Are you saying that as long as an Invite and OK have correct/public addresses in record-route, then it's okay/normal/expected for the contact field to contain a private/unreachable ip address? Is there something besides topoh to just fix/change the contact in this case? If I did use topoh, can I make the mask_ip be the public ip address of kamailio-- like by modparaming to $RAi or a pre-processor define (I have many kams in front of many private uas and don't want to maintain separate configs) ? Thanks
__________________________________________________________ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe:
