Omission in H.245 v7

Rajesh Kumar rkumar at CISCO.COM
Wed Mar 28 21:55:40 EST 2001

Just to add to the below..  NAT and firewalls are no problem per se that the
source IP is translated and the destination IP is that of the actual
destination itself..

but for a proxy we have application based stuff happening.. eg http proxy or
ftp proxy.

What i would like to know is this..

1. Is there a way that we can make our proxies SIP aware or H.323 aware..

2. If we are using a NAT or a firewall then does it actually support the SIP
prioritising mechanisms.. eg.. when i set up a network i tend to prioritise
voice traffic by in turn prioritizing the RTP traffic(for voice quality) or
SIP traffic.. (for call setup etc)
Now will  firewall softwares support this QoS / IP Priority stuff?

else this will be a scenario where half my netowrk components are aware of
Prioritising the traffic and half are not.

Alok Dubey

-----Original Message-----
From: Alok Dubey (OCS-BLRAKS-AVS)
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 1:47 PM
Subject: RE: Firewall/NAT Crossing by H.323/H.248


Can anyone point to the RFC / draft whih tells me the standard encapsualtion
/ message format for data flows across firewalls/proxies/NATs? sure
once that is figured out .. instead of making firewalls/ NAts H.323 aware,
one could simply just change the policies to allow forwarding of H.323
traffic like ordinary HTTP/FTP opening the corresponding

Alok Dubey

For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to
listserv at

More information about the sg16-avd mailing list