Hello Michael, Thank you for your reply.
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Picher, Michael <mpic...@cmctechgroup.com>wrote: > I guess it depends on what is creating that tunnel and where NAT lives. > Cisco is creating the GRE tunnel. From Cisco it goes to PfSense FW. I made NAT set to: *Automatic outbound NAT rule generation (IPsec passthrough)* I think NAT is not necessary since traffic is passing thru the GRE Tunnel and not going out. You can correct me if I'm wrong here. Hoping for your usual response. Many thanks and have a nice day! Rhon > > Your diagram (to me) shows your PBX behind pfSense and then going into some > sort of Cisco device with a GRE tunnel between the Cisco devices. So, is > the PBX traffic really NAT’d? Where does the Tunnel terminate? Your > information is incomplete. > I don't think pbx traffic is NAT'd. Here's my ip topology: SITE A: Cisco/PFSense subnet: 192.168.1.0 Voice Subnet: 192.168.2.0 Tunnel: 10.10.10.1 SITE B: Cisco/PFSense subnet: 172.16.1.0 Voice Subnet: 172.16.2.0 Tunnel: 10.10.10.2 > I assumed (maybe wrongly) that your PBX was behind the pfSense box and > NAT’d. > I not sure how to test this. But please note that we can establish connection using X-Lite via site-to-site without problems. Connection can be established on each sites flawlessly. > > > Mike > > > > *From:* sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto: > sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] *On Behalf Of *Rhon > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 18, 2010 1:01 AM > > *To:* sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] No Voice/IVR on Site-to-Site > > > > I'm using IPSEC GRE and pfsense interfaces have private IPs. should I still > need NAT for that matter? > > Thanks > > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:03 AM, Picher, Michael <mpic...@cmctechgroup.com> > wrote: > > It should be set to manual and yes. > > > > *From:* Rhon [mailto:c4rdi...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, May 17, 2010 9:33 AM > *To:* Picher, Michael; sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] No Voice/IVR on Site-to-Site > > > > Hello Michael, > > I have the static NAT port set to NO on pfsense. > > Also, to I have to enable NAT traversal on sipx? > > Thanks > > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Picher, Michael <mpic...@cmctechgroup.com> > wrote: > > Static NAT port on the pfSense? > > > > *From:* sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto: > sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] *On Behalf Of *Rhon > *Sent:* Monday, May 17, 2010 9:14 AM > *To:* sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > *Subject:* [sipx-users] No Voice/IVR on Site-to-Site > > > > Hi, > > I have a problem with our deployment with SipXecs 4.2 which was installed > fresh using ISO build. > > We cannot hear anything on both sides but are able to connect and can ring > the other end. Calling the IVR is ok but no audio as well. > > SITE A: > 100 - 199 > > SITE B: > 200 - 299 > > Everything passed using Configurations tests. > > Our networks are setup as seen below: > > SITE A SIPX --> PFSENSE --> CISCO --> |||| VIA GRE TUNNEL |||| <-- CISCO > <-- PFSENSE <-- SIPX SITEB > > Any thoughts on what the problem could be? > > I have bypassed everything on the firewall at the moment. > > Thank you in advance. > > Rhon > > > > >
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
