[asterisk-dev] Symmetric RTP behaviour and 'nat' peer option.

[Venefax]

The subject is affecting the whole planet. It would be great if somebody
would explain how it works. I have awful problems with NATted clients.


-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-dev-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-dev-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Alex Balashov
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 8:52 PM
To: Asterisk Developers Mailing List
Subject: Re: [asterisk-dev] Symmetric RTP behaviour and 'nat' peer option.

My interpretation seems to be supported by main/rtp.c:ast_rtp_read():

         /* Send to whoever send to us if NAT is turned on */
         if (rtp->nat) {
                 if ((rtp->them.sin_addr.s_addr != sin.sin_addr.s_addr) ||
                     (rtp->them.sin_port != sin.sin_port)) {
                         rtp->them = sin;
                         if (rtp->rtcp) {
                                 memcpy(&rtp->rtcp->them, &sin, 
sizeof(rtp->rtcp->them));
                                 rtp->rtcp->them.sin_port = 
htons(ntohs(rtp->them.sin_port)+1);
                         }
                         rtp->rxseqno = 0;
                         ast_set_flag(rtp, FLAG_NAT_ACTIVE);
                         if (option_debug || rtpdebug)
                                 ast_log(LOG_DEBUG, "RTP NAT: Got audio 
from other end. Now sending to address %s:%d\n", 
ast_inet_ntoa(rtp->them.sin_addr), ntohs(rtp->them.sin_port));
                 }
         }

Yet, with nat=no, I would expect that NAT would not be "turned on."

I would expect the behaviour under nat=no to follow strict protocol 
mechanics and ignore any received Layer 3 / Layer 4 characteristics, yet 
that is clearly not the case.

Perhaps I am missing something about how Packet2Packet bridging works?

Thanks!

Alex Balashov wrote:

> Greetings,
> 
> I am running Asterisk 1.4.21.2 and seeing some counterintuitive 
> behaviour with regard to RTP and far-end NAT traversal and could use a 
> little perspective.
> 
> The topology looks like this:
> 
>   endpoint <--NAT GW--> NAT traversal fixup proxy <--> Asterisk
> 
> The NAT traversal fixup proxy uses the usual far-end traversal 
> techniques - mangling the Contact header to the received IP, forcing the 
> use of the received port for replies, and SDP received IP endpoint 
> mangling.
> 
> There is a SIP peer built out to the proxy from Asterisk.
> 
> Anyway, when I initiate a call from the phone to a PSTN gateway through 
> this chain (Asterisk bridges the call to a PSTN gateway via SIP), I am 
> seeing the following behaviour.  Here is the scenario:
> 
>   1) Endpoint sends INVITE to proxy;
> 
>   2) Proxy does NAT traversal fixups including substitution of received
>      IP in the m= line of the SDP payload.
> 
>   3) Proxy statefully forwards call to Asterisk.
> 
>   4) When the endpoint starts sending RTP toward Asterisk after the
>      call is established, the source port of the RTP packets is
>      different from the destination port announced in the endpoint's
>      initial INVITE's SDP payload.  This is typical of SIP NAT gateways
>      without SIP-aware ALGs.
> 
> And here is what I am experiencing:
> 
> 1) With nat=no on the peer, Asterisk sends RTP toward the endpoint at 
> the destination port specified in the SDP payload of its INVITE *until* 
> it receives its first RTP packet from the endpoint.  The first RTP 
> packet has a different source port than what was advertised in the 
> endpoint's SDP offer, and from that moment, Asterisk starts sending RTP 
> to the source port of that first media packet *instead* of what is in 
> the SDP.
> 
> 2) With nat=yes, Asterisk ignores the source ports of incoming RTP from 
> the endpoint and continues sending media to the destination port 
> specified in the received SDP.
> 
> ...
> 
> This seems counterintuitive to me.  I had always thought that nat=yes is 
> what enables symmetric RTP, but it seems that the opposite is true in 
> this implementation;  with nat=yes, the received source port of 
> subsequent RTP is ignored and the SDP is used, while with nat=no, 
> attention is paid to the actual received source port.
> 
> What am I missing?
> 
> Thanks!
> 


-- 
Alex Balashov
Evariste Systems
Web    : http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel    : (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775

_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev