Re: [GnomeMeeting-devel-list] NAT traversal / [RFC] secondary STUN server option

[Damien Sandras <dsandras seconix com>]

Le dimanche 29 janvier 2006 à 15:52 +0100, Jan Schampera a écrit :
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:18:06 +0100
> thomas schorpp <t schorpp gmx de> wrote:
> 
> > the app depends on STUN infrastructure.
> > 
> > so lets bring a "Secondary STUN Server" option in prefs.
> I also though about this. But of course you have to clarify (for the
> user) that "Blocked" is both, a real NAT condition OR a broken STUN
> server (well, that's basically how STUN works, the client can't detect
> it, of course).
> 
> But beside these small comments, I'd agree.
> 
> Damien?
> Julien?
> Kilian?
> 

I don't think having a secondary STUN server in the prefs is the right
solution. That sounds like a workaround to me.


> J.
> 
-- 
 _      Damien Sandras
(o-     
//\     GnomeMeeting: http://www.gnomemeeting.org/
v_/_    FOSDEM 2006 : http://www.fosdem.org
        SIP Phone   : sip:dsandras gnomemeeting net 
                      sip:600000 gnomemeeting net