Re: [Linphone-developers] Re: NAT ip/name bug

[Simon Morlat]

Hello,

Thanks for the information.
I'm a bit late in processing my emails at this time...

Simon

Le Samedi 18 Février 2006 18:26, strk a écrit :
> Sorry, I got other feedback. The antisip guy told me
> SDP *requires* FQDN to be handled by SIP servers, so
> I've lost my bet: it's not a linphone bug (hurray).
>
> He also said that lots of providers doesn't respect
> that requirement, but I guess we can't do anything
> from withing linphone about this... nothing worth
> the trouble I mean (like adding a configuration item
> expressing the will to resolve before sending).
>
> --strk;
>
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:58:50PM +0100, strk wrote:
> > I've had this problem in the past:
> > If a name (rather then an IP) is set for the NAT configuration
> > item linphone will usually fail to succeed in a dialog
> > estabilishment.
> >
> > This has been reported by antisip.com :
> >
> > Sems[7839]: Error: (AmRtpStream.cpp)(setRAddr)(419): address not valid
> > (host: my.hostname.net)
> > Sems[7839]: Error: (AmSession.cpp)(run)(209): invalid address
> > Sems[7839]: Error: (AmSession.cpp)(run)(217): 500 unexpected exception.
> >
> >
> > Note that my.hostname.net is a *valid* DNS (masqueraded for privacy
> > reasons).
> >
> > I don't know if it should be antisip.com accepting that as
> > an address or linphone resolving before sending it.
> > What I know is that I had the same problem with other
> > proxies as well, so I'd bet on a linphone bug.
> >
> > --strk;
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linphone-developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/linphone-developers