I’ve seen it come two ways, riding your same MPLS circuit, in which case if you have a dedicated VG you just default route that to your MPLS router and there you go.
The other way is like you say and I’ve done that with at&t and I didn’t have to route with them, they NAT’d everything on their side to me. So I just routed their couple SBC IPs/Subnets across that handoff and my default still goes into my LAN. I’m sure there are other ways as well. Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA Network Engineer Direct Voice: 443.541.1518 Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/heliontech?ref=hl> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/HelionTech> | LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies?trk=top_nav_home> | G+<https://plus.google.com/+Heliontechnologies/posts> From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Norton, Mike Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 5:05 PM To: Erick Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs What I’m failing to understand is... if I set the CUBE’s default route to be my router on my network, then how will CUBE be able to reach the SIP provider’s call servers on the SIP provider’s network? It seems like I will need a routing protocol on whichever side of the CUBE doesn’t get a default route. Is that a normal requirement? Just to back up a bit, I have been assuming CUBE would have two interfaces – one on my network, one on the SIP provider’s network. I’ve always assumed that this was the normal way of deploying CUBE but maybe I’m off base there and getting myself confused. -mn From: Erick [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: February-03-15 6:50 PM To: Norton, Mike Cc: Jason Aarons (AM); [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs Only one voice vrf can be defined in IOS. Global under voice service voip. Cube-SP lets you do multiple vrf's but is EoL and way different configuration. If you plop a cube off your router and router interface is in a vrf and your separate cube is on that network then it should be fine as the cube is just a host then .... with default route to router. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 3, 2015, at 6:08 PM, "Norton, Mike" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Doesn’t have to be two VRFs, could be one VRF and the global route table, if that makes a difference. This idea is no connectivity between them, other than the application-layer connectivity provided by CUBE. This is hypothetical – I’m just trying to understand how/if this would work. I’m looking to plop a CUBE between my network and a SIP provider’s network without having to participate in routing protocol on either side. -mn From: Jason Aarons (AM) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: February-03-15 5:02 PM To: Norton, Mike; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: CUBE across VRFs You have two VRFs, do they have connectivity between them? From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Norton, Mike Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 4:36 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs Can CUBE sit across two separate VRFs? I’ve never used it, but I’m envisioning an ISR having a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at my network, and a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at the SIP provider’s network. I’m thinking this would be the preferred way to do it, but maybe I’m missing something? My Googling is dredging up a lot of really old info that I’m not sure is still relevant. -- Mike Norton itevomcid _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
