From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: nf_nat_sip & nf_conntrack_sip Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 19:13:02 +0200 Message-ID: <4A58C81E.4010606@trash.net> References: <1982.192.168.1.3.1246005268.squirrel@webmail.decimal.pt> <4A44C5B2.9030408@trash.net> <2164.87.196.204.28.1246043247.squirrel@webmail.decimal.pt> <1892.192.168.1.3.1246263728.squirrel@webmail.decimal.pt> <4A48B3F4.8000705@trash.net> <2152.192.168.1.3.1246280022.squirrel@webmail.decimal.pt> <4A48B97C.1060803@trash.net> <3238.192.168.1.3.1247247415.squirrel@webmail.decimal.pt> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3238.192.168.1.3.1247247415.squirrel@webmail.decimal.pt> Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Jorge Bastos Cc: netfilter@vger.kernel.org Jorge Bastos wrote: >>> Then i've been loading the nat modules in the wrong order, it should be >>> always: >>> 1- nf_conntrack_??? options >>> 2- nf_nat_??? >> Yes. >> >>> correct? >>> I've loaded the modules in this order with the parameters and it's >>> working >>> file now :) >>> >>> Explain something to me if possible, why is the SIP module need if >>> everything works without it? >> Well, in that case you don't need it obviously :) In case you're using >> NAT, I guess you're also using STUN or something similar. This does not >> really work reliable with netfilter, although it might appear that way >> most of the time. >> > > Hi Patrick, > continuing this matter, after updating to 2.6.31-rc2-git4 (i needed 'cause > a fix for pty.c for PPTPD connections), loading the modules: > > /sbin/modprobe nf_conntrack_sip sip_direct_signalling=0 sip_direct_media=0 > /sbin/modprobe nf_nat_sip > > When the other person disconnects from the other side, the call remains > active in my side. > Unloading the modules works as expected. > A bug? What exactly do you mean with "remains active"? The expectations?