Subject: [Sipping] [SIP] confused about how to treat NAT/FW, how do you deal with it ?

From: zuo bf <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:25:06 +0800

Hi everybody,

   If this mail shouldn't be here then i am quite sorry for it, but i am
really confused how the real implementation is.

  I have tested 7 network NAT types, 4 of them are symmetric NATs, 2 of them
block UDP and some TCP traffic,
1 of them (this one is ADSL, not a corparation) is full cone, and none of
them support hairpin.
  draft-ietf-sipping-nat-scenarios-03.txt is said to be the best current
practice, but it only handles symmetric NATs,
and using relay server is really inefficient, how do you deal with the block
type NAT ?
  And there are draft-ietf-sip-connect-reuse-04.txt and
draft-ietf-sip-outbound-01.txt serving for the purpose of connection
reuse, but i don't see much difference, what's their real using scenario?
And is there any proxy which supports these extensions?
  Hi guys, what's the real implementation, i can't get this information by
simply searching the internet, i need your help.

Any of your help will be greatly appreciated !!!
Thx !!!

sincerely,
zbf
_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

---

From: Rohan Mahy <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:32:26 -0800

Hi Zuo,

First, I'd like to ask you not to cross-post questions to multiple 
lists.  It creates a very large volume of messages if a thread starts 
up.  In many cases, your question was not even relevant to some of the 
lists you posted to (ex: repro and the sip list).

The NAT scenarios draft is currently being revised to incorporate 
examples using ICE (draft-ietf-mmusic-ice).  ICE describes getting 
media through a variety of NATs and using the best available pair of 
addresses.  As a side effect ICE gets through many firewalls as well.  
ICE only uses a relay if a local or STUN-derived address does not work.

Note that two of your "NATs" block UDP.  These devices are not strictly 
NATs, but also doing some packet filtering or firewall functionality.  
In many cases, implementors use RTP over TCP or even TCP over TLS 
(typically with a relay), when a firewall blocks UDP.

thanks,
-rohan

On Jan 15, 2006, at 18:25, zuo bf wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
>     If this mail shouldn't be here then i am quite sorry for it, but i 
> am really confused how the real implementation is.
>
>    I have tested 7 network NAT types, 4 of them are symmetric NATs, 2 
> of them block UDP and some TCP traffic,
>  1 of them (this one is ADSL, not a corparation) is full cone, and 
> none of them support hairpin.
>    draft-ietf-sipping-nat-scenarios-03.txt is said to be the best 
> current practice, but it only handles symmetric NATs,
>  and using relay server is really inefficient, how do you deal with 
> the block type NAT ?
>  reuse, but i don't see much difference, what's their real using 
> scenario? And is there any proxy which supports these extensions?
>    Hi guys, what's the real implementation, i can't get this 
> information by simply searching the internet, i need your help.
>
> repro-users mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/repro-users