[reSIProcate] testing ice4j against reTurn

[Scott Godin]

Good point.  Right now reTurn requires you to use an actual IP address and
not 0.0.0.0.  We should modify the program to fail to start if in_addrany
is specified on the command line.

Scott

On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Daniel Pocock <daniel at pocock.com.au> wrote:

>
>
> I've just run the ice4j samples:
>
>   ant run-sample
>
> against reTurn from resiprocate
>
> It appears to run fine, except when I initially started up reTurn with
> no command line arguments
>
> - It bound on 0.0.0.0
> - The host is multi-homed, (multiple public IPs)
> - it would receive on one IP and the source address of every response
> packet was the other IP
> - consequently, none of the response packets went through the NAT to the UA
> - there is no clue what is going wrong until you look at it with a
> packet sniffer
>
> When I bind explicitly to one of the addresses, it works fine
>
> Should it detect when it is running on a multi-homed host and exercise
> some control over the source IP of response packets?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.resiprocate.org/pipermail/resiprocate-devel/attachments/20120108/3670eb73/attachment.htm>