Re: [Openh323gk-users] Strange test scenario

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thanks I will try this parameter next monday. When reading and interpreting
the manual about this subject I got the intention that when using the name
"proxy gk" for the child gk the child was doing the proxying for the NAT box
than breakout to a parentGK for certain prefixes thus avoiding proxy traffic
between parent EP and child gk but child gk takes care of the proxying to
his EP . If this is an interpretation error than please let me know.

Nice weekend, Tjapko.




----- Original Message -----
From: "Zygmuntowicz Michal" <m.zygmuntowicz@onet.pl>
To: <openh323gk-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Openh323gk-users] Strange test scenario


> I just setup two 2.0 GKs, one behind (not inside) NAT box and one with
public IP,
> then made a few tests. Test scenario:
>
> EP1---------------CHILDGK------NATBOX-------PARENTGK--------EP2
> 192.168.x.x         192.168.x.x
>
> Here are conclusions:
> *) call from EP1 to EP2 is working fine, assuming PARENTGK has
ProxyForNAT=1;
> *) call from EP2 to EP1 does not work for H.323IDs. Let's say EP1 is
registered with
>     ep1:H323ID and EP2 is registered with ep2:H323ID. Calling "ep1" from
"ep2" results
>     in ARJ from PARENTGK (e.g. it does not forward ARQ to child GKs).
>     I suppose that registering CHILDGK as a gateway with approtiate
prefix(-es) and then
>     addressing using dialedDigits will make calls from EP2 to EP1
possible. But why then
>     PARENTGK should not send LRQ/ARQ to child GKs for H323ids? Any ideas?
>
> I think you should remove any neighbour sections and everything should
work fine.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tjapko Smits - iTS Consultancy" <itsc99@hotmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 11:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [Openh323gk-users] Strange test scenario
>
>
> > The part I don't understand is that same scenario works perfect when
both
> > GK's are in public C. It does not work when the slave Gk is placed in
the
> > routers DMZ with all ports allowed and no firewall activated for this
test.
> > The slave GK does actually come up with a Location confirm but than it
dies
> > immediately because parent site's router don't know where to put the
packet.
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: VM Ware
> With VMware you can run multiple operating systems on a single machine.
> WITHOUT REBOOTING! Mix Linux / Windows / Novell virtual machines
> at the same time. Free trial click
here:http://www.vmware.com/wl/offer/358/0
> _______________________________________________
> List: Openh323gk-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549
> Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 19/08/2003


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: VM Ware
With VMware you can run multiple operating systems on a single machine.
WITHOUT REBOOTING! Mix Linux / Windows / Novell virtual machines
at the same time. Free trial click here:http://www.vmware.com/wl/offer/358/0
_______________________________________________
List: Openh323gk-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549
Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/

[Index of Archives]     [SIP]     [Open H.323]     [Gnu Gatekeeper]     [Asterisk PBX]     [ISDN Cause Codes]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux