Thanks, I'll have a look. I have used pfSense before, a few times, both on PCs, and on pc-engines boards (alix and the earlier Geode one), but I've since found the Mikrotik to be really quite amazing in comparison both in terms of features and cost. Their very impressive Winbox tool runs well under Wine. I had to replace some bulging capacitors on one of the RB450Gs but I read that they'd started using more reliable capacitors since. ________________________________ From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] on behalf of Todd Hodgen [thod...@frontier.com] Sent: 12 May 2011 00:28 To: 'Discussion list for users of sipXecs software' Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Recommended NIC configuration, and extension numbering scheme.
On this list, you will find excellent support for use of the PFSense router. Very affordable, traffic shaping, and several have sample configs you can use. There is an appliance model with three ports for about $214 you can find online. You might want to do a search for comments on the Mikrotik, I’ve seen it discussed on this list, but don’t recall what the discussion was regarding. From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of Carl Farrington Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 4:19 PM To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Recommended NIC configuration, and extension numbering scheme. Thanks Todd. That's fairly straightforward then. I will probably look to use the existing Windows DHCP and DNS servers and share the LAN. These sites would tend not to have proper multi-homed routers, only simple ADSL wireless routers, but I may add a Mikrotik router into the mix for some finer control. thanks for your advice ________________________________ From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] on behalf of Todd Hodgen [thod...@frontier.com] Sent: 12 May 2011 00:01 To: 'Discussion list for users of sipXecs software' Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Recommended NIC configuration, and extension numbering scheme. No, you just want one nic on sipXecs. Users will connect to the User portal based on its domain name and its port number - yoursixpecs.local:8443/sipxconfig/apps Treat sipXecs like any other server, with IP traffic delivered to it based on SRV records. If you are using the sipXecs for your DNS and DHCP, then it is pretty automagic. If you want to put the phones and server on a different network, then just let your local router route between the network. For this size, I suspect you can put them all on the same network using a switch. SipXecs is a ua to ua, calls will get connected via the proxy in sipXecs, but will then be from device to device. Calls to your ITSP, if they are using the internal bridge, will go through the server for the duration of the call. Everyone is using a single nic sipXecs box, it might have more than one on it, but it’s not configured to be used. You are pretty free to use any extension range. Hunt groups are assign extension numbers like phones. 100’s are generally voicemail and auto attendants. From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of Carl Farrington Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 3:46 PM To: sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org Subject: [sipx-users] Recommended NIC configuration, and extension numbering scheme. Can somebody give me some recommendations on NIC configuration on a small (15 user) deployment with a dedicated DSL line for the ITSP trunk? My background is really in Asterisk & FreePBX, and I have to date configured those systems with a dedicated WAN NIC, and either a separate LAN for the handsets, or sharing the same LAN as the PCs, with the necessary boot parameters added to Windows' DHCP server. With the users having a nice sipX web portal, the PCs will need some kind of connectivity to the sipX box. I can see various different ways of doing it, but I don't want to head down one method, only to come across a problem later on. Should I have the entire VoIP system on a separate network, and connect the spare NIC from the sipX box onto the Windows LAN just to allow users access to the web portal? If I do this, then I would have to share a single NIC with the handsets and the WAN connection to the ITSP. Or should I be looking to have the phones on the same IP & physical network as the computers, and the second NIC as a dedicated WAN connection to the ITSP (as I do with Asterisk)? I think I'm mostly confused because of all the different network ports and SIP services being run by the system, and also the notion that the handsets may be invited to communicate directly with the ITSP. Simple question: do the handsets need an IP route to the ITSP, or can all the traffic go through the sipX box? Anybody using single-NIC sipX boxes? Also, unrelated, are there recommendations for numbering schemes? I can see the default for extensions is 2xx, but what about rings groups? If I opt to use 3xx, I may find that this conflicts with some other feature somewhere along the way. Sorry for such elementary questions! thanks, Carl ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 10.0.1375 / Virus Database: 1500/3630 - Release Date: 05/11/11 ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 10.0.1375 / Virus Database: 1500/3630 - Release Date: 05/11/11
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
