Couterpath (<a href="http://www.counterpath.com">www.counterpath.com</a>) (formerly known as Xten) has this Xtunnel (<a href="http://www.xtunnels.org">www.xtunnels.org</a>) which sort of solves the NAT traversal problem. I haven't used it but I think it does. Correct me if I'm wrong. Btw... does anyone have experience using Xtunnel in their system?
<br><br>Of course only clients supporting this are their own.. x-lite & eyebeam, but they aren't the worst clients around. Eyebeam has even sort of "ICE support". Meaning no TURN protocol, but STUN and Xtunnel.
<br><br>- Teemu<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">2005/12/1, Cesc <<a href="mailto:cesc.santa@gmail.com">cesc.santa@gmail.com</a>>:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On 11/30/05, Nils Ohlmeier <<a href="mailto:lists@ohlmeier.org">lists@ohlmeier.org</a>> wrote:<br>> What you are probably thinking of is, that an UA with ICE support could also<br>> advertise its IP address and port of the RTP proxy, but this is then called
<br>> TURN. And I think that is even more far away from becoming a standard,<br>> besides that their are AFAIK no UA's or TURN servers available yet.<br>><br>> Hope this helps<br>> Nils<br>><br>I think that the MiniSIP project is developing one client and
<br>server... <a href="http://www.minisip.org">www.minisip.org</a>, in the "branches" of the SVN repository. No<br>idea how far is it from being usable at all.<br><br>Cesc<br><br>_______________________________________________
<br>Serusers mailing list<br><a href="mailto:serusers@lists.iptel.org">Serusers@iptel.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers">http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers</a><br></blockquote></div>
<br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Teemu Harju<br><a href="http://www.teemuharju.net">http://www.teemuharju.net</a>