<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000'>the great thing is, depending on the device and software, the RTP ports could be different. i used this as my base for my ACLs, but found problems with things like Unity Express and some other SIP clients.<br><br>making ACLs is not an easy task any more.<br><br>doesn't really answer your question, but thought i'd throw that in there.<br><span><br><span name="x"></span>---<br>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. <br> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)<br><span name="x"></span><br></span><br><hr id="zwchr"><b>From: </b>"Mark Holloway" <mh@markholloway.com><br><b>To: </b>"Cisco VoIPoE List" <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net><br><b>Sent: </b>Friday, September 21, 2012 10:23:37 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>[cisco-voip] RTP ports 16384 - 32768<br><br>Does anyone know why Cisco usually references the RTP port range for voice applications as 16384 - 32768? If you're including RTCP (you typically would), the last port would be an odd number. <br>_______________________________________________<br>cisco-voip mailing list<br>cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<br></div></body></html>