[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Linphone-users] Report the bug

From: Roland Häder
Subject: Re: [Linphone-users] Report the bug
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 21:13:50 +0200

On 04/10/2019 08:54 PM, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Apr 2019, 杨智 wrote:
>> I download your app from play store. I install Linphone App in two
>> devices.
>> If these two devices connect to the same wifi network. Make the call,
>> both
>> side cannot heard each other. Once one device used the different network
>> such as another wifi network or 4g. It will work correctly. 
>> Could you give me the explanation?
> Short answer: NAT
> Long answer:
> There is a world wide conspiracy to avoid IP6 so as to keep customers in
> IP4 NAT jail.  Complex firewalls can code multiple SIP users in
> alternate ports - but there is no standard for doing so.  NAT is Evil™.
No, not really a conspiracy theory. In practice, with IPv6 you can give
even toilet brushes a world-wide unique IP address. This means people
are and should be worried that they get an IP address for life-time.

Sure you can "randomize" them (by shufflleing suffix or so?) but
ordinary people don't know this kind of stuff, only geeks. So the
majority of people will have a world-wide unique and one-time IP address.
> Solution: get on IP6.  With a stable IP6, you can do peer to peer calls
> as well.  (Although some library used by linphone-3.6.1 seems to have
> broken
> peer-to-peer in the last 2 months on the Fedora distro.)
No, setup proper NAT. Here on my LAN I use a Fritz!Box router where I
can set that WiFi devices can "see" each other, means reaching each
other as usual. So my smart phone,which is connected by WiFi to my
network, I try to minimize this due to privacy/security concerns BTW.
And it can still reach my computer's web server at port 80/443
(self-signed cert then).

And no: Not every is evil. But remember Snowden and the NSA scandal? :-)
> A VPN can provide a stable IP6 for a mobile device.  A Mesh VPN (like
> Cjdns) can do so efficiently (without relaying through home base).
Does it also give the same/better privacy level as suffixes (I assume it
here) do?

Best regards,

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]