Noah,
Thanks for your input on this. I am not sure if it handles incomng
connections or not - will have to check. I don't think it will work
either - worth a shot to ask though.
Thanks!
- Pedro
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:26:48 -0500, Noah Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > We have a client that wants to bond 2 DSL circuits instead of getting
> > a T-1 (or similar) at their office to run their VoIP traffic on. We
> > came across this Multihomed Gateway (MH200):
> >
> > http://www.cyberpathinc.com/mh200/details.htm
> >
> > Does anybody think this would work if installed at the client location
> > handling NAT for 10 Cisco 7960's and connecting to our public asterisk
> > server?
> >
> > My concern (as is others on this list in regards to load balancing) is
> > what would happen if a call had to be directed out the other WAN port
> > of the MH200 or if a call were to come in on 1 circuit and it runs out
> > of bandwidth - how would the call be delivered to the second circuit.
> > Or even if during a call, the inbound audio is fine (since DSL usually
> > has more bandwidth on the download), but the outbound audio stream had
> > to be pushed out the other WAN port.
> >
> > Hope that all makes sense (I almost confused myself! LOL)
> >
> > I am not holding my breath that this is a viable solution, but was
> > just wondering your thoughts.
>
> I had the displeasure of working with the now defunct iSurfJanus from
> Amplify Networks which is similar to the MH200. I'm not sure the MH200
> is capable of doing what you want it to do. I don't think it does
> "incoming load balancing". The only ways I know of to host a machine
> behind two or more connections, "incoming load balancing", are 1)
> BGP, 2) Cisco HSRP, or with 3) DNS and extremely short TTL values.
> There may be some other ways, but these are the popular ones. The
> multiple WAN devices capable of incoming load balancing like the F5
> BigIP, Fatpipe Products, Radware Linkproof, etc. all use special DNS
> entries to spread the incoming connections between WAN connections.
>
> When I looked at the product specs of the MH200 it makes no mention of
> BGP, DNS, or anything else that might handle incoming connections. In
> fact, it doesn't say anything about incoming connections at all.
>
> To answer your question directly, I don't know how the other products
> work, but I could configure the iSurfJanus to respond to requests only
> on the same connection they came in on. If the MH200 does handle
> incoming connections, you will probably need to ask the folks that make
> it if you can explicitly specify to respond to incoming request on the
> same WAN connection they came in on.
>
>
___
Asterisk-Users mailing list
Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
