[asterisk-users] Why Nat=yes Nat=no Option?
klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at
Thu Nov 13 13:17:23 CST 2008
Alex Balashov schrieb:
> Klaus Darilion wrote:
>> Of course we know that we should implement RFC conform. But RFC 3261 has
>> ignored the fact that the Internet is full of NATs and standard conform
>> implementations can not work. This in the case of SIP it necessary to
>> break the RFC.
> By default?
> NAT itself is a hack; therefore, I would think that NAT traversal
> assistance should be enabled when NAT is used. Why would we presume NAT
> and implement behaviour that is only desirable under NAT as a default?
Because NAT is the default. At least in Austria - most customers get a
NAT router with their DSL Account.
More information about the asterisk-users