Re: [Siproxd-users] Using iptel service ...

[PAZ <rj...@ef...>]

Hi:
	I tried version 0.3.2 and it worked just fine!!!. Voice sounds 
loud and clear. There's only one thing that didn't get to work yet: when 
I sing-in into IPTEL service, I don't see my partner like he was on-line 
(but he is). I forced a communication with him, and I reach him OK. I used 
voice without any trouble.

	Do you know any reason why my partner doesn't appear as on-line? (I 
don't appear as on-line to him either ...). Tomorrow we are going to try 
more than one communicaction behind the NAT firewall simultaneously.

	Thank you.

On Sat, 5 Apr 2003, Thomas Ries wrote:

> Hmm, well... you might want to try out a newer vesion of siproxd,
> (the dayly snapshot, not yet released) at:
> http://www.ries.ch.vu/siproxd/siproxd_04Apr2003.tar.gz
> 
> Up to 0.3.1 there is an issue with the RTP proxy, if siproxd
> is run daemonized. This would result in exactly the symptoms
> you describe.
> 
> On the firewall rules, simply have the port range of
> 'rtp_port_low' to (and including) 'rtp_port_high' ACCEPTed
> 
> It is very likely that I have time to release it this weekend.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> /Thomas
> 
> On  4 Apr, PAZ wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Thomas Ries wrote:
> > 
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> On  1 Apr, PAZ wrote:
> >> > 
> >> > Hi:
> >> > 	I have no luck trying to use iptel.org service with 
> >> > messenger. I am behind a Linux ipchains based NAT, and I opened all 
> >> > suggested ports in README file. With tcpdump, I see iptel.org is trying to 
> >> > reach my external NAT interface, port 8451 udp. Anyone has any idea about 
> >> > this port number?.
> >> 
> >> Might this be the RTP stream (a lot of UDP packets)? If so, this would
> >> indicate that messenger has not registered to siproxd and still sends
> >> its SIP requests directly.
> >> The local UA (-> messenger) must register at siproxd, so siproxd can
> >> act as masquerading proxy in between.
> > 
> > OK. I already had success when I was sing in to Iptel. The problem now is 
> > that the station behind the NAT firewall can establish a voice session to a 
> > remote user, and he can listen everything I said, but I can't hear him. I 
> > presume this is a firewall rule related issue, but I can't positively 
> > affirm this. Any ideas?.
> > 
> > Thank you.
> > 
> >> 
> >> > 
> >> > 	Another question: siproxd does not have to listen in port 
> >> > 7070:7080 also? (or maybe I understand something wrong about that ...).
> >> > 
> >> 
> >> Siproxd will dynamically allocate ports in the range 7070:7080 (and
> >> start listening) for each RTP stream that is started during an INVITE.
> >> Therefore, if no SIP sessions are active, siproxd will *not*
> >> listen on the ports 7070:7080.
> >> 
> >> > 	Thank you in advance.
> >> > 
> >> 
> >> Regards,
> >> /Thomas
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Roberto Paz
> > 
> > "The box said, 'Requires Windows 95 or better', so i installed Linux"
> > TKK 5
> > 
> 

-- 
Roberto Paz

"The box said, 'Requires Windows 95 or better', so i installed Linux"
TKK 5