Why bother with an entire Asterisk server in your "residents". Why not simply deploy SIP handsets in your remote residence and turn on the NAT feature in the Asterisk server in your primary residence?
Yes you could do the VLAN thing and yes you could mess with VPN's etc but for such a small system why bother? All bets are off when you hand off to the Internet anyway. I'd simply make a ring group containing all the handsets on the system so that when a call comes in it rings everywhere and then make all the phones have access to the outgoing service. If a call for the cabin gets answered in the house you can always transfer it. You could then add other features such as additional numbers etc that ring in certain places. Mark (just call me Mr KISS) On Tue, 2007-12-25 at 16:28 -0800, Philip Prindeville wrote: > I have two residents (ok, a house and a cabin) and I want to have phone > service shared between both. > > Both have DSL or PONs networking. And I can have a AstLinux box as the > border appliance at both. > > However, only one has a static IP address, and that one is physically > closest to the Softswitch that I peer with. > > I was wondering about a few things... > > I could set up the house with the Astlinux PBX peering with the > Coppercom softswitch... and then set up the cabin to have a subnet that > my hard SIP phones sit on... and connect that subnet with the SIP phones > back to the house via a VPN connection (privacy for voice traffic isn't > really an issue, so I could use ESP/NULL tunneling). > > The cabin has networking, but the switch that I'm using doesn't > understand 802.1q tagging (VLANs), so I would have to set up the VLANs > on the Astlinux box at the cabin (the "satellite" or "remote" Astlinux > box). It wouldn't run Asterisk, it would just bridge subnets with VPN. > > It supports VLANs, I take it. So that shouldn't be an issue. I can > have all laptops, desktops, etc. run on VLAN 1 natively, and program my > SIP hardphones to run on VLAN 2. > > Oh, and it would have to DHCP server. Question about dnsmasq: when > you're using "reserved" IP addresses, do the addresses still need to > fall inside the bounds of $DHCPRANGE (e.g. 192.168.0.100 - > 192.168.0.252)? Or are reserved addresses expected to be in the > 192.168.0.2 - 192.168.0.99 range? > > Thanks, > > -Philip > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Astlinux-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users > > Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL > PROTECTED] -- Mark Phillips, G7LTT/NI2O Randolph, NJ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Astlinux-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/astlinux-users Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
