<?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: Skype performance tuning in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/skype-performance-tuning/m-p/8097#M5973</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have the same problem and confirmed that configuring the Skype client to use a specific UDP port to listen on and then creating a NAT rule to forward traffic to that port on the computer with the Skype client, greatly improves the picture quality (and a UDP relay isn't indicated in Technical Call info). I'd really like a more scalable way to improve my user's Skype conference calls (that are used to communicate with offshore staff) then creating inbound NAT rules for each user. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2014 17:11:23 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>bjdraw</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2014-04-14T17:11:23Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Skype performance tuning</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/skype-performance-tuning/m-p/8096#M5972</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Good morning everyone,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've been testing a PA-200 unit here and I have a certain issue with Skype, which is mostly due to Skype being very weird about how it uses the network.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Most threads I found around here are about blocking or controlling Skype somehow, but my question is the opposite.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How would you configure your firewall to ensure that Skype gets good "UDP Status" locally? (can be seen in the technical call information).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've configured Skype to use a specific high port, and created a NAT rule to forward that back to my machine (not very scalable as a solution but it was my first test) and that part works, I see UDP connections on that port, yet Skype still reports UDP status as BAD locally, and on the firewall I see tons of attempted UDP on many random ports.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is there any way to have Skype (maybe the Mac version is worse - It doesn't have a lot of the features the Windows one has like not being a supernode etc) not report bad UDP status behind a firewall?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If so, can it also be done for multiple users or does it require specific NAT forwarding rules?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 13:26:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/skype-performance-tuning/m-p/8096#M5972</guid>
      <dc:creator>Guillaume</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-04-17T13:26:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Skype performance tuning</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/skype-performance-tuning/m-p/8097#M5973</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have the same problem and confirmed that configuring the Skype client to use a specific UDP port to listen on and then creating a NAT rule to forward traffic to that port on the computer with the Skype client, greatly improves the picture quality (and a UDP relay isn't indicated in Technical Call info). I'd really like a more scalable way to improve my user's Skype conference calls (that are used to communicate with offshore staff) then creating inbound NAT rules for each user. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2014 17:11:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/skype-performance-tuning/m-p/8097#M5973</guid>
      <dc:creator>bjdraw</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-04-14T17:11:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

