[OpenSIPS-Users] Nathelper vs Nat_traversal

[Bogdan-Andrei Iancu]

You mean the "flags" passed to client_nat_test() ?

Regards,

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu

OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
   https://www.opensips-solutions.com
   https://www.siphub.com

On 23.09.2024 17:36, Robert Dyck wrote:
> I thought perhaps nat_traversal had been abandoned. In nathelper the flags were
> changed to strings but not so in nat_traversal.
>
> On Sunday, September 22, 2024 11:46:47 P.M. PDT Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yes, the idea was to have them merged. The underlying concept in
>> nat_traversal is more robust and complex, but it does not cover all the
>> functionalities as provided by nathelper.
>>
>> The big advantage of nat_traversal is that it is able to keep track of
>> non-registering sessions (for NAT pining), like for calls or presence
>> subscriptions. If you have a 100% registrations driven platform, it will
>> not make too much of a difference for you.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>
>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>     https://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>     https://www.siphub.com
>>
>> On 18.09.2024 20:24, Robert Dyck wrote:
>>> I am reaching out to users and developers.
>>>
>>> I read that nat_traversal was supposed to replace nathelper. It appears
>>> that they have co-existed for many versions now. Nat_traversal is
>>> supposed to overcome NAT issues in a multi proxy environment.
>>>
>>> Looking at the functions provided by the two modules it doesn't look like
>>> nathelper's functionality has been completely replicated in nat_traversal.
>>>
>>> Is anyone using nat_traversal, possibly with also nathelper?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>