On Monday 02 March 2009, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote: > >> Anyhow, as best practice , the OPTIONS method is more appropriate > >> for nat pinging. > > > > I have to disagree. OPTIONS generate 2-3 times more traffic because > > of the bigger replies. OTOH, it doesn't really matter if we get a 200 > > OK or a negative reply to such a keep-alive request, does it? All it > > matters is that the device behind NAT sends something (anything) to > > keep the NAT open from inside. NOTIFY gets the job done with less > > traffic, which makes it better. > > Indeed, the OPTIONS may generate more traffic (depends on the > implementation - kphone sends with SDP also, other not). But when comes > to interoperability, OPTIONS is more accepted by end devices, rather > then NOTIFY (where the phone must implement the method and the event).
I don't think the phone needs to implement or for that matter even be aware of the NOTIFY method. Any device should reply with a "not implemented" or "method not understood" negative reply to any method it doesn't support. Any reply will do for the purpose of keepalive, be it positive or negative. In practice I have not encountered any device that would not reply to a keep-alive NOTIFY. -- Dan _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
