QUESTION NAT Traversal and Yealink

[atsak]

Is there any way to get a Yealink phone to work inside a NAT without a STUN server?

 

[phonebuff]

VPN Tunnel --

NeoRouter --

 

[atsak]

No, I don't want to set that up. So they're not like every other endpoint out there?

 

[DaveDog]

I've got over 100 of them running inside firewalls talking to hosted servers

 

[atsak]

They send the private IP inside the SIP headers though unless you use an ALG . . . or am I missing something?

 

[Chris Sweeney]

They send the private IP inside the SIP headers though unless you use an ALG . . . or am I missing something?

Did you figure this out? I've never had any trouble in the past with this as long as setting NAT=YES in the extension config. Recently I started using STUN though as a best practice when I configure new devices just so that in some devices you can set it if it loses connection with the STUN server it reboots. There is a public STUN at stunserver.org if you are just looking not to create one of your own.

 

[krzykat]

I like using the NAT=YES, because sometimes those public STUN servers go down. When they do, that means that your clients will be out of luck. I used to use the public STUN, but now the NAT=YES works very well and I've never had an issue. The YeaLink will auto register anytime your network goes off and then comes back on.

 

[atsak]

I always have NAT=yes in the extension config, but ran into a situation lately where it was not working setup that way - one way audio. When I looked at the SIP caps, I only saw the private IP which I assumed was the cause. It was a Telco router and it was old. Using a public STUN server did work, but I hate that for commercial type deployments; I don't really want to run my own but guess might have to.