[OpenSIPS-Users] NAT: Why replacing "Contact" with thereceivedpublic IP:port instead of adding a parameter with it?

[Klaus Darilion]

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu schrieb:
> Hi Iñaki,
> 
> If I'm not wrong, it's it the "maddr" param what you are looking for. 
> Without aiming a bias, I was also evaluating the option to store the 
> original contact and to restore it back.

Technically, I think maddr can be used (and there is some vendor 
equipment which uses it) and is probably the easiest way to implement 
this feature.

But I think from the semantic point of view using maddr (=multicast 
address) is misleading, as it is defined for usage of SIP with multicast.

regards
klaus

> 
> Regards,
> Bogdan
> 
> Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
>> 2008/11/7 Schumann Sebastian <Sebastian.Schumann at t-com.sk>:
>>   
>>> Hi Inaki
>>>
>>> Yes, you are right. Seems my changes work where they should (all same type of phones where modification has to take place, Contact header somehow "well-defined") but are not universal.
>>>
>>> I will take your inputs to improve my used functions. Thanks!
>>>     
>> I suggest you to study the SIP URI BNF grammar in RFC 3261. It's really complex.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>>
>>   
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users