On 2016-05-27 12:58, James Knott wrote:
On 05/27/2016 03:05 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
If they're behind NAT, they need some means to tell the other end what their real address is. STUN does that. It also wouldn't be necessary if NAT wasn't in the way. Yep, like I said you make it out to be a big deal. The STUN server took about 5mins to set up and it runs and runs and runs. The telephone is configured to enable STUN when it's provisioned. NAT is a fact of life, likely will be for quite some time to come. When everyone has public addresses, we can stop the STUN server, woohoo.
The deal is it's still a hack to get around problems caused by NAT. Of course, NAT is a hack to get around the address shortage, so STUN is a hack on top of a hack.
Yes. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)