[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0014198]: [patch] Not possible to register to a registrar via a host with different port number

[Asterisk Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=14198 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                Nick_Lewis
Assigned To:                putnopvut
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   14198
Category:                   Channels/chan_sip/Registration
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   feature
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     confirmed
Asterisk Version:           1.6.0 
Regression:                 No 
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): N/A 
SVN Revision (number only!):  
Disclaimer on File?:        N/A 
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2009-01-08 08:51 CST
Last Modified:              2009-01-09 07:20 CST
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    [patch] Not possible to register to a registrar via
a host with different port number
Description: 
It is currently possible to register to a registrar indirectly via a host
using an extended format of the registration string
[transport://]user[:secret[:authuser]]@host[:port][/contact][~expiry]

In this extended format the "user" portion is expanded to
"username at domain". In this case the registration packet is sent to the
address of the "host" but the request line uri indicates that the registrar
is at the address of the "domain". This works fine as long as default port
numbers are used

However if the host includes a "port" other than 5060 then the request
line uri also contains this port even though the registrar may be on a
different port number or on the standard port

There needs to be a way in the registration string to specify the port of
the registar too e.g. "user" expand to "username at domain:domainport"
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0097276) blitzrage (administrator) - 2009-01-09 07:20
 http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=14198#c97276 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Why don't you just make it so you have to place the extra separators, but
still allow the secret and authuser to be blank?

udp://lmadsen@remotedomain:5666::@somehost:5060/incoming~60

Especially since the way you have the syntax laid out implies that secret
and authuser should be optional. Some documentation with examples of using
the syntax's will also be necessary in order to try and confuse people less
;) 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2009-01-09 07:20 blitzrage      Note Added: 0097276                          
======================================================================