All very good points. I've largely been able to avoid NAT up until now, so I'm afraid I'm a bit too green to offer any clarification.
- Jeff On 9/8/09 1:08 AM, "Thomas Gelf" <[email protected]> wrote: > Thomas Gelf wrote: >> Jeff Pyle wrote: >>> if (client_nat_test("3")) { >>> force_rport(); >>> $avp(s:received_uri) = $source_uri; >>> if (!is_method("REGISTER")) fix_contact(); >>> setbflag(7); >>> } # nat_keepalive() further down after some pref checks > > One more thing: I'm doing client_nat_test("1) in reply routes (should > make sense), client_nat_test("7") for REGISTERs and client_nat_test("3") > for other requests. While I'm pretty sure regarding the reply_route part > (you cannot use test 2 and 4 as Via headers are nothing but copies from > Request), I'm wondering whether the latter distinction between REGISTER > and other request is making sense. > > Googling and having a look to Flavios book shows that also others are > doing so - why?? If test 4 matches, the request would for sure also > trigger test 2 wouldn't it? So, may I completely skip test 4? > > There is one special case that comes to my mind: does test 2 somehow > respect the rport parameter? I mean, if topmost Via has a private IP > and rport set - is test 2 then still triggered? > > Best regards, > Thomas Gelf _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
