[Asterisk-Users] Known SIP - NAT Solutions?

[Roderick Montgomery]

According to Jon Pounder:
> When situations like this arise all the time, why is there such a delay in
> getting ipv6 rolled out when it solves all these problems ?

How does IPv6 solve address translation problems? If you mean to suggest
that more addresses would eliminate the need for NAT, understand that
address scarcity is not the only reason for address translation. Not wanting
to start a nanog-style flamewar, there are plenty of IPv4 addresses rotting
away, unused.

Even if IPv6 were fully deployed, we'd still see address translation for
basement multihoming, smooth network migration, and brain-dead security on
the cheap. And there would still be uber-paranoid firewalls that are
misconfigured or policy-bound to be hostile to SIP and h.323 traffic.

Other services have demonstrated that SIP can be successful with a user
agent behind an IPv4 NAT. I'm glad to read that work is being done to allow
asterisk to deal with NATted user agents; my ATA-186 is about to declare
civil war against my NATting wireless access point.

rm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Roderick Montgomery   rod at thecomplex.com   <URL:http://thecomplex.com/>
the fool stands only to fall, but the wise trip on grace... [Sarah Masen]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------