<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Luki <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lugosoft@gmail.com">lugosoft@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Darryl,<br>
<br>
OK, that could work but it makes the use of these phones behind<br>
consumer routers rather impossible. How many of those will inspect and<br>
transform SIP packets? Oh why does Cisco have to do things differently<br>
from everyone else...<br>
<br>
Luki<br>
<br>
2009/11/16 Darryl Dunkin <<a href="mailto:ddunkin@netos.net">ddunkin@netos.net</a>>:<br>
<div class="im">> You need to enable SIP transformations on the firewall, the packets will<br>
> have to be dynamically re-written to handle multiple Cisco phones of<br>
> these models. Be sure 'nat=no' is set in sip.conf for the phones as<br>
> well, or Asterisk will reply to the incorrect ports (source instead of<br>
> the mangled contact header).<br>
><br>
> In this case, you'll need to compile in the SIP connection tracking/NAT<br>
> bits in the kernel, they should be able to mangle the packets<br>
> appropriately. I have never tested this, as all my deployments have<br>
> hardware firewalls with SIP support built-in.<br>
<br>
</div><div><div></div><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a href="http://www.api-digital.com" target="_blank">http://www.api-digital.com</a> --<br>
<br>
asterisk-users mailing list<br>
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:<br>
<a href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users" target="_blank">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>I use two accounts on a Cisco 7941 at home that is connected to my asterisk server running at a datacenter. My home has NAT, my asterisk server does not. I do not need to do any of the packet mangling stuff, just set "nat=no" in the sip.conf entry for the Cisco phone. Not sure how much different the 7971 is though...<br clear="all">
<br>-- <br>Thanks,<br>--Warren Selby<br><a href="http://www.selbytech.com">http://www.selbytech.com</a><br>