[Serusers] STUN server

[Lucas Aimaretto]

> >> > > > > > Make sure you are not behind a Symmetric NAT. If 
> so, you're 
> >> > > > > > dead. STUN does not work with Symmetric NAT.
> >> > > > > 
> >> > > > > If a UA is behind Symmetric NAT, and
> >> > > > > UA use STUN, and
> >> > > > > SER have [RTP/Media]Proxy to handle Symmetric NAT, this UA 
> >> > > > > should be fine, right?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Yes, but, if UA is behind symmetric NAT, I would not 
> configure 
> >> > > > STUN to it. I'd just led mediaproxy solve the problem.
> >> > >
> >> > > But if you have 100 clients,
> >> > > it would be hard to put all clients in one group.
> >> >
> >> > LA> Good point !
> >> > 
> >> > LA> Yes, it is true. If stun can not solve the nat problem,
> >> > media proxy
> >> > LA> should fix it with no trouble at all.
> >> > 
> 
> >> If there is no symmetric NAT and I have installed STUN and
> >> Mediaproxy on my server. Which one will have higher priority 
> >> to handle this call session? Is it always STUN? Of course if 
> >> I don't need to pass the call to PSTN gateway. Just IP-phone 
> >> to IP-phone. Can you set the priority in ser.cfg? and how?
> 
> LA> It is not a matter of priorities. It depends on how you get your 
> LA> mediaproxy configured. You need to be aware that nated clients 
> LA> should use the media proxy, because of the nat problem. 
> But, if your 
> LA> client can find ( using stun for example ) his public 
> ip/port, then, 
> LA> from mediaproxy point of view, this client is not nated, 
> and so, it 
> LA> needs not treatment ( no fixing from part of media proxy ).
> 
> LA> You can always do this: Get every traffic proxied along 
> mediaproxy. 
> LA> But, if clients can talk to each other being able to bypass 
> LA> mediaproxy, why should you proxy your communications ???
> 
> LA> Hope to be clear
> 
> LA> Regards,
> 
> LA> Lucas
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, it makes sence.
> It would be the best solution I'd say, but it reminds me 
> JavaRocks statement that STUN makes problems in some 
> circumstances.. Just wondering what problems? Maybe some UA's 
> not supporting STUN?

The only circumstances that I know where STUN does not help is when the
UA is located behind a symmetric nat. In the othre 3 cases of nat, it
should help you just fine. Or if the clients do not implement a good
stun-client or the stun server does not implement the protocol
correctly. But, let say that every body follows the standars ( JA!, ask
cisco ) ... you should not have problems at all.

Regards,

Lucas

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.4 - Release Date: 06/04/2005