[asterisk-dev] Including port number on SDP Contact

[Robert Moskowitz]

Johansson Olle E wrote:
> 13 jan 2008 kl. 23.09 skrev Robert Moskowitz:
>   
>> I have discovered a challenge with Asterisk running with a public IP
>> address and thus not needing NAT, when working with a service that of
>> course knows there has to be a NAT there....
>>
>> I come here to the developer's list, as this requires some inside
>> understanding of SIP/SDPs.
> At this point, you have to change the source code.
>
> If there's no port number mentioned in a SIP uri, it means that we  
> default to the default in the RFC, which is 5060. So there's should be no need to add  
> it to the URI and it should not make any difference in an ideal world ;-)
Being one of the co-authors of RFC1918, I know the difference between 
and ideal world and the Internet :)

So if the SIP trunking definition for Broadvoice had, say, a port=6050, 
then :6050 would be in all the 'appropriate' URIs. Then I would need an 
IPTABLES packet mangler to attack all SIP packets, changing the port 
from 6050 to 5060 and all imbedded URIs as well.

Scary thought. Guess I will just have to threaten Broadvoice that they 
fix this or I am going elsewhere. As their behaviour is what is broken...