----- Original Message ----- From: "voice" <[email protected]> To: "Scott Lawrence" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 10:19 AM Subject: Re: [sipX-dev] Installing 3.11.x
> Hi Scott > > Thanks for you time > > Took your advice before you gave it and did a new SVN installation still > with two NIC but eth0 as sipX. I set up DHCPd just to be save and running > DSN on the same box with fowarding to our primary DNS at the far end of our > network. Basic 3.11 box identical to 3.10 box's Centos5 config. > > Now as far as routing goes, I did nothing. My thinking is that sipXbridge > will handle routing. My thinking goes like this. SipX is running in private > address space and to reach ITSP(sip truck) in sipX i will set NAT/SBC to > ITSP via 2nd NIC's public address space. In 3.10 sipX SBC points to ITSP > and the sipX GW is eth1 on the inGate firewall. Remote phones FE proxy > points to the Ingate with SIP Sever pointing to sipX. So substitution of > sipXbrige for inGate it should work the same. > > Am i correct in thinking sipXbrige will handle routing. My plan was to > use/follow the routing script instruction found on sipX that used the > Bandwidth.com (ITSP registration not needed). Or is there more to this > story? > > But now for the real tricky piece. > > After a new install with NIC's configured to address sipX notion of Network > operation and everything identical to the 3.10 production box sipX will not > function. DHCPd/DNS test all complete aOK. I point the browser to sipX > ipaddress it fines it, converts it to the https:8443 port and goes no > further thus no producing the web admin. > > So what's the trick that i missed? > > r > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Scott Lawrence" <[email protected]> > To: "voice" <[email protected]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 9:41 AM > Subject: Re: [sipX-dev] Installing 3.11.x > > > > On Sat, 2009-02-21 at 11:33 -0600, voice wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > I will install into test Centos5 box. 3.11.x from svn and install on a > dual > > > nic box. > > > > > > By default > > > eth0 is public(56.19.x.x) and > > > eth1 is private (192.168.10.2) == sipX. gateway 192.168.10.1 netmask > > > 255.255.0.0 > > > > This configuration is not recommended. See > > > > http://sipx-wiki.calivia.com/index.php/Redundant_network_interfaces > > > > > hostname of box is sipx.ssss.net, which is public DNS domain and > associated > > > to eth0. > > > > > > 1. How does sipX distinguish between the 2 NIC's at intallation time? > > > > The current setup scripts will use only eth0. Putting SIP devices on > > the other network may or may not work at all (this depends in part on > > the other SIP devices and how you have routing configured on that > > network). > > > > > 2. After downloading from sipX and creating SSL does sipX default to > > > hostname of box, which is a public domain. Does this make sense when > sipX > > > is running in the boxes private space. OR should sipX not be installed > on > > > dual NIC box and use only 1 NIC with public address. > > > > > > 3. Does sipX need to have the DHCP server running to function when in > fact > > > all registration well be remote registration. On this box no local > nodes. > > > > Some diagnostics may complain if there is no DHCP, but it should work as > > long as the phones are happy. > > > > > 4. When installing sipX using svn what is the relationship between eth0 > and > > > sipX domain name used when configuring sipX > > > > > > Does 3.11.x still need the config.defs to function? > > > > It won't when it's done... not quite there yet, I believe > > > > > _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
