On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 2:15 AM, Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The problem in doing this is that further packets from port 49xxx > wouldn't be recognized as belonging to the same connection. OK, makes sense. > The same problem exists with your current patch, packets from port > 5060 to the same destination won't be recognized as belonging to the > connection that sent the REGISTER and thus won't be able to modify the > timeout or unregister. > > Basically we would need three-legged connections to handle this > situation correctly. Just to clarify: the actual source port on a given device will be EITHER a high-numbered port (Cisco) or 5060 (others). I have not come across any devices that send from a "mix" of source ports, e.g. 49xxx for REGISTER and then 5060 for INVITE. >From what I have seen, subsequent SIP requests from the Cisco phone are indeed getting associated with the original connection. My phone is logging into two different SIP accounts, and each account seems to use its own unique UDP source port for all control traffic (both expecting replies on 5060). If Netfilter adds support for three-legged connections, will the third leg show up in the tuplehash so I don't have to track it in the "help" structure? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
