[SR-Users] question about nat_uac_test

[Klaus Darilion]

On 07.01.2014 16:54, Brian Davis wrote:
> The other interesting issue in this case is that the 192.xx.xxx.xxx
> address is not an RFC1918 address, but it is also not reachable from

I should have known that if it is an RFC1918 address, you would not have 
to mask it.

> kamailio.   That is why I hoped kamailio would trigger NAT traversal
> logic solely on the fact that the source and contact address are different.

Here is my very pragmatic approach for NAT traversal: Forget about 
nat_uac_test(). Just always force NAT traversal [1], as it does not harm 
if the users are not behind NAT. It may increase traffic on your media 
relay but reduces support calls from customers.

Probaly the elegant solutions would be to apply NAT traversal only for 
SIP and use SIP client with ICE support (and provide a turn relay).

regards
Klaus




[1] use add_contact_alias(), handle_ruri_alias() and 
fix_nated_register(). Do not use fix_nated_contact(). Further, apply NAT 
traversal only if the clients are directly "connected" to your proxy 
(not if there are other devices inbetween).

>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 5:01 AM, Klaus Darilion
> <klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at <mailto:klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at>> wrote:
>
>
>     On 03.01.2014 16:59, Brian Davis wrote:
>>     REGISTER sip:test1.test.com:5060 <http://test1.test.com:5060> SIP/2.0
>>     Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>>     96.xxx.xxx.xxx:33745;rport;branch=z9hG4bKf5s1p`n3TRv5TZx5RXy.RVv+JPz8Nat*UX!8KRx4SRx
>>
>>     Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>>     192.xx.xxx.xxx:33745;branch=z9hG4bKeb263246c44095f072d8167dd0c7987a343134;rport
>>
>>     Contact: "Joe" <sip:xxxyyyzzzz at 192.xx.xxx.xxx:33745;transport=udp>
>
>>     Dec 30 03:33:45 sip-01 kamailio[20489]: INFO: <script>:
>>     3b0400ca43e28f78f3e6dc945a084b88 at 192.xx.xxx.xxx
>>     <mailto:3b0400ca43e28f78f3e6dc945a084b88 at 192.xx.xxx.xxx>|log|source 96.xxx.xxx.xxx:33745
>
>     Actually the source IP seem to be identical to the topmost Via address.
>
>     But it should detect the private IP address in the contact header.
>
>     Maybe you have an exception, that NAT traversal is not triggered, if
>     there is more than 1 Via header.
>
>     Klaus
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
>     sr-users at lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users at lists.sip-router.org>
>     http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>