login | register
Sat 17 of May, 2008 [05:36 UTC]

voip-info.org

Navigation
Today's Deals
Recently Visited Pages
Search with Google
Search this site with Google. Results may not include recent changes.
 
Google Ads
Last Changes
Shoutbox
  • Juan Ortega, Thu 15 of May, 2008 [10:33 UTC]: Hi everybody, I'm Juan, an ITCom student, and I need to know what basic elements I need to create a VoIP network. Can anybody helpme, please?,Thank you very much
  • gineta, Wed 14 of May, 2008 [03:58 UTC]: any here not fine the configuration of firewall juniper -screem for VOIP asterisk????
  • Anoop Prabhakaran, Tue 13 of May, 2008 [12:16 UTC]: I am developing Asterisk IVR, Whenever i make a internation call to the IVR system, the DTMF is not getting detected properly, this happens only for the first time, second call onwards system works fine. why this is happening
  • joe, Mon 12 of May, 2008 [04:27 UTC]: Is there an opensource browser based softphone, or a system like Busta where everything is not manages through their website?
  • Nick Barnes, Fri 09 of May, 2008 [11:36 UTC]: Christopher - yesterday I tried an Asterisk install on a CentOS 5.1 box with stock GUI and it all worked fine. Sorry I can't help.
  • aero, Fri 09 of May, 2008 [08:20 UTC]: can someone help me out on this, i tried to play some sound files on my asterisk box and this is the error message i got. WARNING[4429]: format_wav.c:169 check_header: Unexpected freqency 22050 May 8 11:17:39 WARNING[4433]: codec_gsm.c:194 gsmtolin_fra
  • Christopher Faust, Thu 08 of May, 2008 [14:15 UTC]: I beleive that I may have to change something in the xserver configuration. Please advise
  • Christopher Faust, Thu 08 of May, 2008 [14:14 UTC]: Everything was perfect. In the bios I have increased the memory allocated Still receive input not supported on my display.
  • Christopher Faust, Thu 08 of May, 2008 [14:13 UTC]: This would not be my main box. I am doing some testing to see if I can install zaptel and asterisk 1.4 on a full centos 5.1 box with development software Its bizzare, because before I went through the asterisk and zaptel installation everything was perfe
  • Nick Barnes, Thu 08 of May, 2008 [13:44 UTC]: Christopher - I can't see any way in which an Asterisk installation would muck your GUI, but remember that it is advised not to use a GUI on an Asterisk box anyway.
Server Stats
  • Execution time: 0.31s
  • Memory usage: 2.20MB
  • Database queries: 29
  • GZIP: Disabled
  • Server load: 0.35

NAT survey

This is a survey of types of NAT in various equipment.
See NAT and VOIP for more information about the problems with IP-telephony and NAT.
Use STUN clients to test equipment and add your result here using either cone NAT,
restricted cone NAT, port restricted NAT or symmetric NAT (see here for definitions).

  • W-Linx
    • MB400-X2: cone NAT
  • D-Link
    • DI-604: cone NAT
    • DI-624: cone NAT (if "Game mode" is enabled, else Symmetric NAT)
    • 500G Adsl router: Symmetric NAT

  • DSLink
    • 220e Adsl router: Symmetric NAT

  • ZOOM
    • X4: port restricted cone NAT

  • Acer
    • WLAN 11b Broadband Router: port restricted cone NAT

  • Linksys
    • BEFW11S4 v3.2: Full Cone NAT
    • WRT54G Port Restricted Cone NAT

  • Zyxel
    • 660 Series (Including HW61) : Symmetrical NAT and plus HW61 has SIP ALG which tryes to solve NAT problems (but does it wrongly)

  • NetGear
    • MR314: Full Cone NAT for UDP and Symetric NAT for TCP


See Also

Created by oej, Last modification by ibc on Wed 13 of Feb, 2008 [15:04 UTC]

Comments

Comments Filter

by Flavio E. Goncalves on Friday 27 of July, 2007 [20:38:38 UTC]
It is important to test the NAT device with the standard configuration. Sometimes, If you previously have redirected ports, it will show your NAT device as Full Cone. I´m seeing the Linksys Routers reported as Full Cone. In the standard router configuration most Linksys routers are Port Restricted Cone. Most ADSL routers based on the Globespan Virata chipset are Symmetric NAT devices.

Really port restricted cone NAT?

by Ian Hubbertz on Tuesday 19 of December, 2006 [10:17:35 UTC]
Please always check if the behaviour is really port restricted cone NAT, and not a "preserve the port whenever it is possible and if it is not, do symmetric NAT"-NAT.

The latter is the default behavior of iptables and is detected as Port Restricted Cone NAT by STUN. However, as soon as two internal devices start to communicate with the same port to the same server/port (e.g. two internal phones to an external STUN-Server) the NAT-Router changes to symmetric mode (although Cone NAT would still be possible).

Stats on NAT in a residential context,

by thom levy on Monday 10 of October, 2005 [13:37:20 UTC]
Here are some partial statistics on NAT (by type).
It is based on data available at: http://www.cafzone.net/ipb/lofiversion/index.php/t25279.html
Tested NAT: 18
PortRestrictedCone: 6 (33%)
FullCone: 5 (27%)
Symmetric: 6 (33%)
RestrictedCone: 1 (5%)

Any other results going in the same direction?

TomCat

Linksys Routers

by permutations on Saturday 07 of May, 2005 [17:23:37 UTC]
Linksys Tech Support says their routers are all Full Cone NAT (which is what I would expect), but all the STUN servers I've tried say it's Restricted Cone NAT. Perhaps this is due to my software firewall.
Edit

LINKSYS BEFSR42 V1

by Anonymous on Monday 08 of March, 2004 [16:46:06 UTC]
Address restricted NAT

Please update this page with new information, just login and click on the "Edit" or "Add Comment" button above. Get a free login here: Register Thanks! - support@voip-info.org

Page Changes | Comments

Sponsored by:
Terms of Service Privacy Policy
© 2003-2008 VOIP-Info.org LLC

Powered by bitweaver