Re: FW: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
You could always build yourself a cheap pfsense box. Scott Ivory wrote: Any other suggestions for dual wan hardware that handles seamless failover? My experience with Hotbrick (albeit 4 years ago) was a nightmare. Thanks! -Original Message- From: Apache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henry L.Coleman Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 6:47 AM To: asterisk@uc.org Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL Thanks for all the input on this subject, it's nice to know where to get information on a subject without having to find out the hard way that it doesn't work or it's impracticle. Thanks again. Henry - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
I'd agree that pfSense is the easiest and most reliable way to configure what your looking for. The only thing that pfSense doesn't currently do is bandwidth throttling while doing load balancing, so if that is not a deal breaker go with it. If you need it, you'll either have to spend some big bucks or spin your own in iptables or using shorewall ( which is what I did ). I've used XinCom dual wan routers. The OEM that makes the XinCom and the HotBrick is LeadFly out of Taiwan. I've had OKAY experience with them but they just don't give you the level of control or reliability that I found acceptable. I've no experience withthe DLink, but these lower end boxes are mainly geared to do basic load balancing across the 2 connections based on either desitation IP, packets or sessions with limited QOS. Fallover is not always smooth and connection auto re-establishment is not always reliable. Mike Chuck Mariotti wrote: My understanding is that www.pfsense.com has dual connection failover (could build rules on traffic, etc...) might be a better route to take. Regards, Chuck -Original Message- From: Apache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henry L.Coleman Sent: August-28-07 1:17 PM To: asterisk@uc.org Subject: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Mike Ashton Quality Track Intl Ph: 647-722-2092 x 301 Cell: 416-527-4995 Fax:416-352-6043 QTI CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION The contents of this material are confidential and proprietary to Quality Track International, Inc. and may not be reproduced, disclosed, distributed or used without the express permission of an authorized representative of QTI. Use for any purpose or in any manner other than that expressly authorized is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately delete it and all copies, and promptly notify the sender. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
mmm perhaps a talk on ipfw and dummynet would be good :) since most of the group is highly technical now Mike Ashton wrote: I'd agree that pfSense is the easiest and most reliable way to configure what your looking for. The only thing that pfSense doesn't currently do is bandwidth throttling while doing load balancing, so if that is not a deal breaker go with it. If you need it, you'll either have to spend some big bucks or spin your own in iptables or using shorewall ( which is what I did ). I've used XinCom dual wan routers. The OEM that makes the XinCom and the HotBrick is LeadFly out of Taiwan. I've had OKAY experience with them but they just don't give you the level of control or reliability that I found acceptable. I've no experience withthe DLink, but these lower end boxes are mainly geared to do basic load balancing across the 2 connections based on either desitation IP, packets or sessions with limited QOS. Fallover is not always smooth and connection auto re-establishment is not always reliable. Mike Chuck Mariotti wrote: My understanding is that www.pfsense.com has dual connection failover (could build rules on traffic, etc...) might be a better route to take. Regards, Chuck -Original Message- From: Apache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henry L.Coleman Sent: August-28-07 1:17 PM To: asterisk@uc.org Subject: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Mike Ashton Quality Track Intl Ph: 647-722-2092 x 301 Cell: 416-527-4995 Fax:416-352-6043 QTI CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION The contents of this material are confidential and proprietary to Quality Track International, Inc. and may not be reproduced, disclosed, distributed or used without the express permission of an authorized representative of QTI. Use for any purpose or in any manner other than that expressly authorized is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately delete it and all copies, and promptly notify the sender. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Henry L. Coleman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
Look at a management tool called Big Brother (www.bb4.com). You can set that to do much more granular work that just PING. Then, launch new routing scripts as appropriate when it sees events. - dbc. -Original Message- From: Apache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henry L.Coleman Sent: August-28-07 1:17 PM To: asterisk@uc.org Subject: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Henry L. Coleman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
Henry: I 100% agree with the rational for what you are doing, however I wouldn't do this on the Asterisk box. I would look into a hardware appliance for this. Something like a HotBrick LB-2 would work great for this and they are fairly cheap as well. http://www.redundantinternet.com/en/LB-2.html Regards, Bill - Original Message - From: Henry L.Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: asterisk@uc.org Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:16 PM Subject: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Henry L. Coleman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
My understanding is that www.pfsense.com has dual connection failover (could build rules on traffic, etc...) might be a better route to take. Regards, Chuck -Original Message- From: Apache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henry L.Coleman Sent: August-28-07 1:17 PM To: asterisk@uc.org Subject: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Henry L. Coleman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
John: Good question, I have the answer for you. You can tell the box to prefer one connection over the other for certain routes (based on source or destination IP address) during normal operation (both connections up). If the preferred connection fails, then the traffic falls over to the other connection. Bill - Original Message - From: John Van Ostrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bill Sandiford [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 2:17 PM Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL Bill Sandiford wrote: Henry: I 100% agree with the rational for what you are doing, however I wouldn't do this on the Asterisk box. I would look into a hardware appliance for this. Something like a HotBrick LB-2 would work great for this and they are fairly cheap as well. http://www.redundantinternet.com/en/LB-2.html This might not perform as you expect. It's probably used to load balance things like HTTP sessions where the from IP address is less of an issue. How would one control which WAN would be used to register SIP? Then when a WAN connection fails Asterisk would still need to re-register. Could you register via both? When I've done this in the past, I've established a VPN over the Internet (I controlled both ends) and when the IP changed the VPN would re-establish and all the existing connections would lurch forward and continue one. Still in your case calls would go dead until the LAN re-established. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
