On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:12 PM, I?aki Baz Castillo <ibc at aliax.net> wrote: > Hi Benny, why don't you implement UDP Outbound? it has no mistery for > the client, it just does the same as in case of TCP (adding ;ob to > Contact URI for non-REGISTER and ;reg-id Contact header param for > REGISTER). And then instead of sending double CRLF for NAT keep-alive, > the SIP UDP client must send STUN Binding Requests (RFC 5389) to the > SIP UDP port of the proxy/server. That's all :) > I know. That means our SIP transport must be able to multiplex STUN traffic, which means to bring pjnath dependency into pjsip library. Something that I'm hesitant to do as that would increase the footprint of non-NAT embedded apps. For now we only need outbound for its NAT traversal capability, not for its reliability feature (i.e. the multiple flows thing). So in this case the existing UDP + STUN works just fine. > PS: I've a SIP proxy implementing Outbound for SIP UDP/TCP/TLS > clients. Ask me if you want to test. > Have you tested with TCP yet? Benny
