«

Roger wrote:
> you've missed the point - the comment that was made was that STUN was
> sure to cause problems with voip.co.uk.


As discovered by the original poster, voip.co.uk use whether the IP
address is an RFC1918 address to work out how they treat the call.

If you use STUN (and it works correctly) then you won't report an
RFC1918 address to voip.co.uk, and they may treat your call as if you
are on a public IP address. If you are natted, then this may cause a
problem.



Tim

<> wrote in message
news:...
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:25:47 GMT, "Roger" <>
> wrote:
>
>>
>><> wrote in message
>>news:. ..
>>> On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 08:19:50 GMT, "Roger" <>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>sorry but its been working fine here for over 6 moths with STUN
>>> And it has been working fine here for over 12 months now without
>>> STUN .
>>you've missed the point - the comment that was made was that STUN was sure
>>to cause problems with voip.co.uk.
> And I was told by voip.co.uk that using stun CAN cause problems with
> their service .
Strange - I thought "CAN" and "SURE TO" were two very different things but
then again after a year of sipgate service maybe my english deteriorated as
much as my phone service (stands back and waits for the Ron/Ivor tag team to
take over the thread)