[Linphone-developers] Re: NAT ip/name bug

[strk]

Sorry, I got other feedback. The antisip guy told me
SDP *requires* FQDN to be handled by SIP servers, so
I've lost my bet: it's not a linphone bug (hurray).

He also said that lots of providers doesn't respect
that requirement, but I guess we can't do anything
from withing linphone about this... nothing worth
the trouble I mean (like adding a configuration item
expressing the will to resolve before sending).

--strk;

On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 05:58:50PM +0100, strk wrote:
> I've had this problem in the past:
> If a name (rather then an IP) is set for the NAT configuration
> item linphone will usually fail to succeed in a dialog
> estabilishment.
> 
> This has been reported by antisip.com :
> 
> Sems[7839]: Error: (AmRtpStream.cpp)(setRAddr)(419): address not valid
> (host: my.hostname.net)
> Sems[7839]: Error: (AmSession.cpp)(run)(209): invalid address
> Sems[7839]: Error: (AmSession.cpp)(run)(217): 500 unexpected exception.
> 
> 
> Note that my.hostname.net is a *valid* DNS (masqueraded for privacy
> reasons).
> 
> I don't know if it should be antisip.com accepting that as
> an address or linphone resolving before sending it.
> What I know is that I had the same problem with other
> proxies as well, so I'd bet on a linphone bug.
> 
> --strk;