Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
Vikas topg...@gmail.com writes: The ISP said that they ran a fiber optic wire to a media box at our office and from there there is a RJ45 to the switch. They bring no new equipment to our premises each time we provison a new port. Hence this upload speed limitation is not due to the copper wire. So the ISP is being deliberately difficult. I am assuming that their motivation is that they want to sell E1's instead of the 512kbps lines. You can fight your ISP by installing various multiplexing equipment, but it's an arms race, and they will probably win it -- losing you as a customer obviously doesn't worry them, while you're apparently willing to go to great lengths to stay with them. I would recomment just switching to E1 (preferably with a different provider). It's that or moving HQ to somewhere sane. /Benny ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
This discussion is not making any sense to me. Just what type of access product is this? If you have fiber to the premise and are handed Ethernet from there to a Cisco switch, it is some sort of Metro Ethernet or NMLI (Native Mode LAN Interconnection) type product. It could also be framed over mid-band gear over copper at some point in the circuit design and they could be fibbing you on the fiber to the premise bit; the fiber involved may actually be a remote terminal or mux somewhere in the vicinity. Either way, if you have media converter CPE on your premises, this is an Ethernet product. If that's so, there's no 512 kbps line. There is no xDSL. And there is no incentive whatsoever to sell copper circuits as Ethernet transport is usually more expensive and high-margin product. Do you have a routed IP interface on your side? If so, what equipment is it on? It's not the switch, as the switch is Layer 2. On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:09:03 +0100, Benny Amorsen benny+use...@amorsen.dk wrote: Vikas topg...@gmail.com writes: The ISP said that they ran a fiber optic wire to a media box at our office and from there there is a RJ45 to the switch. They bring no new equipment to our premises each time we provison a new port. Hence this upload speed limitation is not due to the copper wire. So the ISP is being deliberately difficult. I am assuming that their motivation is that they want to sell E1's instead of the 512kbps lines. You can fight your ISP by installing various multiplexing equipment, but it's an arms race, and they will probably win it -- losing you as a customer obviously doesn't worry them, while you're apparently willing to go to great lengths to stay with them. I would recomment just switching to E1 (preferably with a different provider). It's that or moving HQ to somewhere sane. /Benny ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
Oh--you mentioned in an earlier post that the Cisco switch was installed by the ISP, so presumably that is something they consider their CPE as well. You can't rate-limit IP bandwidth on Layer 2 switches, and a Catalyst 2950 does not have a Layer 3 feature set; that only comes with MSFCs on higher-order Catalysts. So, they are doing in some fashion other than on the switch ports, which is why I asked about the routed interfaces; does anything plugged into a given port have a separate routed interface? -- Alex On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 04:17:37 -0500, Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.com wrote: This discussion is not making any sense to me. Just what type of access product is this? If you have fiber to the premise and are handed Ethernet from there to a Cisco switch, it is some sort of Metro Ethernet or NMLI (Native Mode LAN Interconnection) type product. It could also be framed over mid-band gear over copper at some point in the circuit design and they could be fibbing you on the fiber to the premise bit; the fiber involved may actually be a remote terminal or mux somewhere in the vicinity. Either way, if you have media converter CPE on your premises, this is an Ethernet product. If that's so, there's no 512 kbps line. There is no xDSL. And there is no incentive whatsoever to sell copper circuits as Ethernet transport is usually more expensive and high-margin product. Do you have a routed IP interface on your side? If so, what equipment is it on? It's not the switch, as the switch is Layer 2. On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:09:03 +0100, Benny Amorsen benny+use...@amorsen.dk wrote: Vikas topg...@gmail.com writes: The ISP said that they ran a fiber optic wire to a media box at our office and from there there is a RJ45 to the switch. They bring no new equipment to our premises each time we provison a new port. Hence this upload speed limitation is not due to the copper wire. So the ISP is being deliberately difficult. I am assuming that their motivation is that they want to sell E1's instead of the 512kbps lines. You can fight your ISP by installing various multiplexing equipment, but it's an arms race, and they will probably win it -- losing you as a customer obviously doesn't worry them, while you're apparently willing to go to great lengths to stay with them. I would recomment just switching to E1 (preferably with a different provider). It's that or moving HQ to somewhere sane. /Benny ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
A 2950 can be configured to limit the speed per port... I guess the ISP here is operating this way because they are out of the way and have limited bandwidth themselves, so, they are trying to split up the bandwidth provided into smaller, more manageable chunks to avoid overloading things at their end... In asia here too the ISP that has service in this building has put in 24port switches, if I ask for ethernet service, I'm told there's no such thing, all I can order is ADSL, if I order ADSL, I get a 10Mb/s ethernet connection to the switch, but then internet access is provided over PPPoE limited to 3Mb/s both ways, I can get additional connections, to the same switches, with seperate PPPoE accounts, again limited to 3Mb/s... So, at least I'm luckier than Vikas, but, there is no alternative... There are features I would like, but, in a monopoly you get what your given... It's possible to load balance traffic over 4 connections though without any help from the ISP... It won't be perfectly balanced, but it will do a reasonably decent job... The options are many though and it depends on what kit you have... I've done it with cisco routers before without nat where the ISP was happy to support it and linux firewalls with nat with multiple ISPs... d 2009/2/13 Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.com Oh--you mentioned in an earlier post that the Cisco switch was installed by the ISP, so presumably that is something they consider their CPE as well. You can't rate-limit IP bandwidth on Layer 2 switches, and a Catalyst 2950 does not have a Layer 3 feature set; that only comes with MSFCs on higher-order Catalysts. So, they are doing in some fashion other than on the switch ports, which is why I asked about the routed interfaces; does anything plugged into a given port have a separate routed interface? -- Alex On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 04:17:37 -0500, Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.com wrote: This discussion is not making any sense to me. Just what type of access product is this? If you have fiber to the premise and are handed Ethernet from there to a Cisco switch, it is some sort of Metro Ethernet or NMLI (Native Mode LAN Interconnection) type product. It could also be framed over mid-band gear over copper at some point in the circuit design and they could be fibbing you on the fiber to the premise bit; the fiber involved may actually be a remote terminal or mux somewhere in the vicinity. Either way, if you have media converter CPE on your premises, this is an Ethernet product. If that's so, there's no 512 kbps line. There is no xDSL. And there is no incentive whatsoever to sell copper circuits as Ethernet transport is usually more expensive and high-margin product. Do you have a routed IP interface on your side? If so, what equipment is it on? It's not the switch, as the switch is Layer 2. On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:09:03 +0100, Benny Amorsen benny+use...@amorsen.dk benny%2buse...@amorsen.dk wrote: Vikas topg...@gmail.com writes: The ISP said that they ran a fiber optic wire to a media box at our office and from there there is a RJ45 to the switch. They bring no new equipment to our premises each time we provison a new port. Hence this upload speed limitation is not due to the copper wire. So the ISP is being deliberately difficult. I am assuming that their motivation is that they want to sell E1's instead of the 512kbps lines. You can fight your ISP by installing various multiplexing equipment, but it's an arms race, and they will probably win it -- losing you as a customer obviously doesn't worry them, while you're apparently willing to go to great lengths to stay with them. I would recomment just switching to E1 (preferably with a different provider). It's that or moving HQ to somewhere sane. /Benny ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
The ISP tells me that it is a Metro Ethernet product. Here is a picture of the box made by Mc Mans tel where the ISP inputs a fat black wire. I have never heard of Mc Mans tel and googling it comes up with nothing. http://www.grmtech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/img_0035_1-300x225.jpg From this McManstel box the output is two yellow CAT5 cables. Here is a picture showing the wiring on this McManstel box. Interesting thing to note is that McManstel box does not even take a power supply so it cannot be running its own processor or OS. http://www.grmtech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/black-wire-input-and-two-eth-yellow-wire-output-300x225.jpg These two yellow wires go to the CISCO Catalyst 2950 switch. Here is a picture showing the input to the CISCO switch: http://www.grmtech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/input-to-the-cisco-switch-300x128.jpg From the CISCO switch I have two wires coming out and going to my two different stand alone linux server which act as my routers. Here is a picture showing the output from the CISCO switch going to the two linux servers: http://www.grmtech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/cisco2950-24ports-farleft-two-output-300x89.jpg My questions are: 1. The black wire coming into the Mc Manstel box is that a fibre optic cable ? 2. What is the Mc Manstel box doing ? 3. What CISCO router do I need to buy to do bandwidth aggregation at my end ? I have made a blog post with pictures and the problem statement that I will keep updated as I learn more about the problem and the eventual solution. The link to the blog post is at: http://www.grmtech.com/blog/kolkata-broadband/ If you need any infroamtion from me let me know and I will find it and post it here. Some of the technicians working for the ISP have been helpful so if there is some question that I can ask them to be able to figure out what is going on here let me know and I will ask the technicians from the ISP and post the responses here. Thanks once again for taking time out to help me. On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 3:30 AM, Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.com wrote: Oh--you mentioned in an earlier post that the Cisco switch was installed by the ISP, so presumably that is something they consider their CPE as well. You can't rate-limit IP bandwidth on Layer 2 switches, and a Catalyst 2950 does not have a Layer 3 feature set; that only comes with MSFCs on higher-order Catalysts. So, they are doing in some fashion other than on the switch ports, which is why I asked about the routed interfaces; does anything plugged into a given port have a separate routed interface? -- Alex On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 04:17:37 -0500, Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.com wrote: This discussion is not making any sense to me. Just what type of access product is this? If you have fiber to the premise and are handed Ethernet from there to a Cisco switch, it is some sort of Metro Ethernet or NMLI (Native Mode LAN Interconnection) type product. It could also be framed over mid-band gear over copper at some point in the circuit design and they could be fibbing you on the fiber to the premise bit; the fiber involved may actually be a remote terminal or mux somewhere in the vicinity. Either way, if you have media converter CPE on your premises, this is an Ethernet product. If that's so, there's no 512 kbps line. There is no xDSL. And there is no incentive whatsoever to sell copper circuits as Ethernet transport is usually more expensive and high-margin product. Do you have a routed IP interface on your side? If so, what equipment is it on? It's not the switch, as the switch is Layer 2. On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:09:03 +0100, Benny Amorsen benny+use...@amorsen.dk wrote: Vikas topg...@gmail.com writes: The ISP said that they ran a fiber optic wire to a media box at our office and from there there is a RJ45 to the switch. They bring no new equipment to our premises each time we provison a new port. Hence this upload speed limitation is not due to the copper wire. So the ISP is being deliberately difficult. I am assuming that their motivation is that they want to sell E1's instead of the 512kbps lines. You can fight your ISP by installing various multiplexing equipment, but it's an arms race, and they will probably win it -- losing you as a customer obviously doesn't worry them, while you're apparently willing to go to great lengths to stay with them. I would recomment just switching to E1 (preferably with a different provider). It's that or moving HQ to somewhere sane. /Benny ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile :
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Vikas wrote: In my opinion the only strategy that has a high probability of success is: Get a Cisco with five ethernet ports. Use one for your connection to asterisk. Use the other four as your connection to the ISP, and MUX them. Can you please point me to some resource on how to MUX ? [snip] Actually that was a bit tongue-in-cheek as I didn't think it was a serious option due to cost. Also I don't think you can properly MUX these lines without a similarly configured Cisco on the other side. How about BigIP? They make multi-upstream load balancer products. Again very pricy, but I think it is exactly what you are looking for. http://www.f5.com/solutions/availability/link-load-balancing/ j ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
2009/2/13 Vikas topg...@gmail.com My questions are: 1. The black wire coming into the Mc Manstel box is that a fibre optic cable ? 2. What is the Mc Manstel box doing ? 3. What CISCO router do I need to buy to do bandwidth aggregation at my end ? 1) Yes 2) It's stopping you from poking the fibre... the point where they spliced the fibre coming in to the fibre running to the switch is on that plastic box... 3) A cisco router with at least 5 ethernet interfaces, which would likely be expensive, but, look at http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk361/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080950834.shtmlfor more info... d ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
I have two more questions: 1. Is it a technical reason that the ISP has restricted the upload to 512 Kbps or is it a Marketing reason that they have restricted the upload ? 2. Can I boot the cisco switch in run level 1 and modify the rate limits on each of the ports ? This vidoe talks about booting into run level 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VY5B6cTkT8 There are multiple tutorials to modify the rate limits on google search. Obviously I am NOT going to do it without getting an ok from the ISP but is this all that is needed ? What would do if you found yourself in such a situation ? Thanks once again for such valuable feedback. On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 8:21 AM, D Tucny d...@tucny.com wrote: 2009/2/13 Vikas topg...@gmail.com My questions are: 1. The black wire coming into the Mc Manstel box is that a fibre optic cable ? 2. What is the Mc Manstel box doing ? 3. What CISCO router do I need to buy to do bandwidth aggregation at my end ? 1) Yes 2) It's stopping you from poking the fibre... the point where they spliced the fibre coming in to the fibre running to the switch is on that plastic box... 3) A cisco router with at least 5 ethernet interfaces, which would likely be expensive, but, look at http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk361/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080950834.shtml for more info... d ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Vikas topg...@gmail.com wrote: What would do if you found yourself in such a situation ? I would switch to a phone company phone line. An E1 or T1. It sounds like this company is a data provider and not a phone company. ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
1. Is it a technical reason that the ISP has restricted the upload to 512 Kbps or is it a Marketing reason that they have restricted the upload ? Marketing most likely. If they have fiber in the building, it would be a symmetric link. I have never seen a fiber connection that isn't the same up and down. They are just trying to sell it like DSL. 2. Can I boot the cisco switch in run level 1 and modify the rate limits on each of the ports ? 2950's don't support rate limiting, they are just semi-dumb layer2 devices. They have to be doing this upstream on a router somewhere. ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
Just google 2950 and rate-limit and you'll see that it's possible to do so with the EI immagebut in 1 Mbps increments. Frank -Original Message- From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Alex Balashov Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 3:31 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ? Oh--you mentioned in an earlier post that the Cisco switch was installed by the ISP, so presumably that is something they consider their CPE as well. You can't rate-limit IP bandwidth on Layer 2 switches, and a Catalyst 2950 does not have a Layer 3 feature set; that only comes with MSFCs on higher-order Catalysts. So, they are doing in some fashion other than on the switch ports, which is why I asked about the routed interfaces; does anything plugged into a given port have a separate routed interface? -- Alex On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 04:17:37 -0500, Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.com wrote: This discussion is not making any sense to me. Just what type of access product is this? If you have fiber to the premise and are handed Ethernet from there to a Cisco switch, it is some sort of Metro Ethernet or NMLI (Native Mode LAN Interconnection) type product. It could also be framed over mid-band gear over copper at some point in the circuit design and they could be fibbing you on the fiber to the premise bit; the fiber involved may actually be a remote terminal or mux somewhere in the vicinity. Either way, if you have media converter CPE on your premises, this is an Ethernet product. If that's so, there's no 512 kbps line. There is no xDSL. And there is no incentive whatsoever to sell copper circuits as Ethernet transport is usually more expensive and high-margin product. Do you have a routed IP interface on your side? If so, what equipment is it on? It's not the switch, as the switch is Layer 2. On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:09:03 +0100, Benny Amorsen benny+use...@amorsen.dk wrote: Vikas topg...@gmail.com writes: The ISP said that they ran a fiber optic wire to a media box at our office and from there there is a RJ45 to the switch. They bring no new equipment to our premises each time we provison a new port. Hence this upload speed limitation is not due to the copper wire. So the ISP is being deliberately difficult. I am assuming that their motivation is that they want to sell E1's instead of the 512kbps lines. You can fight your ISP by installing various multiplexing equipment, but it's an arms race, and they will probably win it -- losing you as a customer obviously doesn't worry them, while you're apparently willing to go to great lengths to stay with them. I would recomment just switching to E1 (preferably with a different provider). It's that or moving HQ to somewhere sane. /Benny ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel: (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775 ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
The ISP giving net access at our office has installed a 24 port CISCO 2950 switch in our server room. I can buy 24 connections from them and get 12Mbps of Upload but each individual connection is restricted to 512Kbps. Currently we have requirement of 20 simulataneous calls so we purchased 4 connections from the ISP. Giving us a total of 2 Mbps of upload b/w but spread over 4 different connections from the ISP. Each connection we buy from the ISP gives us the right to use one port on this CISCO 2950 switch. So curretly we have purchased 4 connections from the ISP and hence we have the right to use 4 ports on this switch. My three questions are: 1. Is there any technical reason behind why the ISP will not sell more then 512 Kbps of b/w on a single port to us ? 2. Can I do something to over come the restriction put by the ISP. 3. Is there an automated script that can load balance the asterisk calls across these 4 connections ? Thanks, ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Vikas topg...@gmail.com wrote: The ISP giving net access at our office has installed a 24 port CISCO 2950 switch in our server room. I can buy 24 connections from them and get 12Mbps of Upload but each individual connection is restricted to 512Kbps. My three questions are: 3. Is there an automated script that can load balance the asterisk calls across these 4 connections ? This is crazy. Just tell the ISP that you want the port rate limit on a single port to be 2M. -- Heath Roberts htrobe...@gmail.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
I have asked the ISP to rate limit a single port to 2M but my requests have got me no where, I would really appreciate any suggestions on what I can do at my end since I have given up hope of the ISP co-operating with me, Thanks, On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Heath Roberts htrobe...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Vikas topg...@gmail.com wrote: The ISP giving net access at our office has installed a 24 port CISCO 2950 switch in our server room. I can buy 24 connections from them and get 12Mbps of Upload but each individual connection is restricted to 512Kbps. My three questions are: 3. Is there an automated script that can load balance the asterisk calls across these 4 connections ? This is crazy. Just tell the ISP that you want the port rate limit on a single port to be 2M. -- Heath Roberts htrobe...@gmail.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Vikas topg...@gmail.com wrote: My three questions are: 1. Is there any technical reason behind why the ISP will not sell more then 512 Kbps of b/w on a single port to us ? Yes. Somebody programmed their equipment that way and didn't train anybody else on Cisco before they got a better job. A Cisco 2950 can do 100Mbps per port (or 1000Mbps if it's a 2950G), and while you can't send all of that upstream, you can send way more than 12Mbps upstream. 2. Can I do something to over come the restriction put by the ISP. Yep, lots of things, none of which are going to be as direct as telling them that you've found another ISP who will give you what you want, and either they can remain your ISP and rehire the guy who knows how to program Cisco gear, or you are terminating your contract. Unless you live truly in the middle of nowhere, you will be able to find somebody else who can provide your phone service. Also, twenty simultaneous connections sounds a lot like a traditional T1. Call your phone company and compare the price of getting a T1 versus what these clowns are charging you. Just because you have voip now, doesn't mean it's cheaper than POTS. Asterisk does a great job of acting as a T1 to voip gateway. You can even get appliances for that task. 3. Is there an automated script that can load balance the asterisk calls across these 4 connections ? It will be way easier to write your termination letter than to write that script. This is a human problem, and not an asterisk problem. ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
Vikas topg...@gmail.com writes: My three questions are: 1. Is there any technical reason behind why the ISP will not sell more then 512 Kbps of b/w on a single port to us ? The copper to your location only handles 512kpbs per pair, so they add an extra modem every time they open a new port? 2. Can I do something to over come the restriction put by the ISP. Most likely not. 3. Is there an automated script that can load balance the asterisk calls across these 4 connections ? If you get a different IP address on each port, it's hard. You'd need a device which could do flow-based NAT, and that would only work for outbound calls. On the other hand, if the ISP cooperates, there are lots of options: a) Multi-pair SDSL modems b) Multi-link PPP c) Equal-cost multipath /Benny ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
Get a Cisco with five ethernet ports. Use one for your connection to asterisk. Use the other four as your connection to the ISP, and MUX them. Great way to spend 5K :) j On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Vikas wrote: I have asked the ISP to rate limit a single port to 2M but my requests have got me no where, I would really appreciate any suggestions on what I can do at my end since I have given up hope of the ISP co-operating with me, Thanks, On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Heath Roberts htrobe...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Vikas topg...@gmail.com wrote: The ISP giving net access at our office has installed a 24 port CISCO 2950 switch in our server room. I can buy 24 connections from them and get 12Mbps of Upload but each individual connection is restricted to 512Kbps. My three questions are: 3. Is there an automated script that can load balance the asterisk calls across these 4 connections ? This is crazy. Just tell the ISP that you want the port rate limit on a single port to be 2M. -- Heath Roberts htrobe...@gmail.com ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:41:51 Jeff LaCoursiere wrote: Get a Cisco with five ethernet ports. Use one for your connection to asterisk. Use the other four as your connection to the ISP, and MUX them. Great way to spend 5K :) j On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Vikas wrote: I have asked the ISP to rate limit a single port to 2M but my requests have got me no where, I would really appreciate any suggestions on what I can do at my end since I have given up hope of the ISP co-operating with me, As someone who works for an ISP, the best advice I can give you is to tell them where to go (*after* fully setting up and testing a new ISP that is). With the economies of the world tighter then usual at present, and ISP's a plenty, I can only suggest they are idiots or for some reason they don't want your business Michael ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] CISCO 2950 - 4 connections - Cap of 512 Kbps - How to bond ?
In my opinion the only strategy that has a high probability of success is: Get a Cisco with five ethernet ports. Use one for your connection to asterisk. Use the other four as your connection to the ISP, and MUX them. Can you please point me to some resource on how to MUX ? All the other suggestions have a very low probability of success since: As someone who works for an ISP, the best advice I can give you is to tell them where to go (*after* fully setting up and testing a new ISP that is). In this town in Asia this is the only ISP that would work given the requirements of low latency to the VOIP server on the west coast and their ability to keep the connection up. Call your phone company and compare the price of getting a T1 versus what these clowns are charging you. Each 512Kbps of upload costs $40 but a T1 to handle 20 calls will cost much more then $160 a month. And to answer a question that was asked: The copper to your location only handles 512kpbs per pair, so they add an extra modem every time they open a new port? The ISP said that they ran a fiber optic wire to a media box at our office and from there there is a RJ45 to the switch. They bring no new equipment to our premises each time we provison a new port. Hence this upload speed limitation is not due to the copper wire. Any suggestions on what to do from this point on, Thanks for your time, On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Michael mich...@networkstuff.co.nz wrote: On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:41:51 Jeff LaCoursiere wrote: Get a Cisco with five ethernet ports. Use one for your connection to asterisk. Use the other four as your connection to the ISP, and MUX them. Great way to spend 5K :) j On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Vikas wrote: I have asked the ISP to rate limit a single port to 2M but my requests have got me no where, I would really appreciate any suggestions on what I can do at my end since I have given up hope of the ISP co-operating with me, As someone who works for an ISP, the best advice I can give you is to tell them where to go (*after* fully setting up and testing a new ISP that is). With the economies of the world tighter then usual at present, and ISP's a plenty, I can only suggest they are idiots or for some reason they don't want your business Michael ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
