<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: 7.0.8 to 7.1.8 upgrade - H.323 not working in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/152343#M50398</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/8545"&gt;@GavinPalmer&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;the scalability&amp;nbsp;of this solution would wholly&amp;nbsp;depend on your environment; for example in my environment&amp;nbsp;the scalability&amp;nbsp;of this is sensible&amp;nbsp;and it's exactly what we do with our few actual video conferencing units. I always tell clients that this type of equipment should be a 1-1 anyways seeing as Polycom in particular has real issues sitting behind NATs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;PATs are acceptable granted that you can actually get it working; I wish I still had my cheat sheet from when I setup a few units to be used with verizon hotspots because I spent a fair amount of time figuring it all out but unfortunately I can't locate the list. Polycom is pretty notorious for behaving poorly behind a PAT&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2017 16:14:28 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>BPry</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-04-12T16:14:28Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>7.0.8 to 7.1.8 upgrade - H.323 not working</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/150597#M49983</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Dear All,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have recently upgraded as the title suggests, and since upgrading our Polycom Group series video conference units are not working correctly on H.323 protocol. &amp;nbsp;When we connect to either a public video bridge or direct to another Polycom device, we are unable to hear the caller ont he conference. &amp;nbsp;This was previously working in 7.0.8.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;From our initial investigations, we are able to get this working by configuring a static NAT rule for the Polycom device. &amp;nbsp;However when the device using the general Trust -&amp;gt; Untrust dynamic NAT it does not seem to work correctly. &amp;nbsp;We have performed packet captures which all seem to be flowing correctly and we are not seeing any dropped packets.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have also configured a Trust -&amp;gt; Untrust ANY ANY security rule for the polycom to make sure its not being blocked from that perspective.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The only thing I can think of is that the traffic is not being routed back for some reason due to some change involving NAT that was implemented since 7.0.8.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can anyone think of why we are having this issue?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 2017 15:23:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/150597#M49983</guid>
      <dc:creator>GavinPalmer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-03-31T15:23:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 7.0.8 to 7.1.8 upgrade - H.323 not working</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/151188#M50098</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Seriously... No one wants to take a stab at this one? lol&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2017 08:32:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/151188#M50098</guid>
      <dc:creator>GavinPalmer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-05T08:32:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 7.0.8 to 7.1.8 upgrade - H.323 not working</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/151190#M50100</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Gavin,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would stick to using static NATs for both inbound and outbound, this is how I've always set up VoIP/video conferencing NAT rules.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Additionally you may be facing this issue, but you'd need to look at the global counters in combination with a packet filter.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/Learning-Articles/Session-setup-fails-due-to-session-hash-collision-error/ta-p/70539" target="_blank"&gt;https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/Learning-Articles/Session-setup-fails-due-to-session-hash-collision-error/ta-p/70539&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/Management-Articles/How-to-check-global-counters-for-a-specific-source-and/ta-p/65794" target="_blank"&gt;https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/Management-Articles/How-to-check-global-counters-for-a-specific-source-and/ta-p/65794&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;hope this helps,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ben&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2017 08:39:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/151190#M50100</guid>
      <dc:creator>bmorris1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-05T08:39:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 7.0.8 to 7.1.8 upgrade - H.323 not working</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/151327#M50118</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I agree with the static NAT's, I also prefert to make them bi-directional, causes less of a headache with asymentric routing.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2017 22:58:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/151327#M50118</guid>
      <dc:creator>OtakarKlier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-05T22:58:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 7.0.8 to 7.1.8 upgrade - H.323 not working</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/152325#M50389</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Guys,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ok so If use static NAT's and I have 8 meeting rooms with Polycom devices, that would mean 8 public IP addresses. &amp;nbsp;Surely that's not scalable? &amp;nbsp;Maybe some kind of PAT would be a better option? &amp;nbsp;What does everyone think?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2017 13:08:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/152325#M50389</guid>
      <dc:creator>GavinPalmer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-12T13:08:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 7.0.8 to 7.1.8 upgrade - H.323 not working</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/152329#M50391</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Gavin,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes that is how I have done it in the past with these polycomm video conferencing devices. Do polycomm have a central server that you could set up on your internal network, with all the devices calling back to that? Then you just need to do a 1-to-1 static NAT for the central server.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You could you PAT in theory to send the traffic to the right video phones but I do not think you can change the ports the video units use.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;hope this helps,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ben&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2017 13:44:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/152329#M50391</guid>
      <dc:creator>bmorris1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-12T13:44:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 7.0.8 to 7.1.8 upgrade - H.323 not working</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/152343#M50398</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/8545"&gt;@GavinPalmer&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;the scalability&amp;nbsp;of this solution would wholly&amp;nbsp;depend on your environment; for example in my environment&amp;nbsp;the scalability&amp;nbsp;of this is sensible&amp;nbsp;and it's exactly what we do with our few actual video conferencing units. I always tell clients that this type of equipment should be a 1-1 anyways seeing as Polycom in particular has real issues sitting behind NATs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;PATs are acceptable granted that you can actually get it working; I wish I still had my cheat sheet from when I setup a few units to be used with verizon hotspots because I spent a fair amount of time figuring it all out but unfortunately I can't locate the list. Polycom is pretty notorious for behaving poorly behind a PAT&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2017 16:14:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/7-0-8-to-7-1-8-upgrade-h-323-not-working/m-p/152343#M50398</guid>
      <dc:creator>BPry</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-12T16:14:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

