[asterisk-users] Same provider - IAX sounds bad, SIP sounds great

[Alejandro Imass]

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Kevin P. Fleming <kpfleming at digium.com> wrote:
> On 02/29/2012 08:22 AM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
>

[...]

> The number of 'plain' SIP endpoints deployed behind consumer-grade NAT
> devices talking to Asterisk servers on public IP addresses is in the
> millions, if not the tens of millions. As has already been posted, Asterisk
> itself handles all the far-end NAT traversal duties necessary for this to
> work; neither the remote endpoint nor the NAT device need to do anything
> special, nor do they require any configuration.
>
> Rather than post a lengthy exposition on how widespread your network is and
> how technically astute your people are, you would probably accomplish much
> more to setup a simple test scenario as has been previously suggested, and
> if it does not work for you, post the details of the scenario and the
> failure here.
>

We use SIP and IAX interchangeably, but had less hassle with IAX. The
topic of the discussion on this thread was that SIP is so awesome and
that IAX is a peice of crap. My point of view is that we've had many
problems with SIP and NAT and that IAX just works great for us, and
that in *our* experience IAX has worked better for us.

Just to clear my head up a bit: are you supporting the argument that
SIP is better for Asterisk than IAX?