srv records do that.
On Jul 4, 2011 2:03 PM, "Todd Hodgen" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Shouldn't this be a function of the remote device as well. After all, if
> it has the mappings to the two different IP addresses for the WAN ports,
> should you be able to register either way? In a failure of it's primary
> registration, you need it to register with the secondary WAN port. A
manual
> way around this is with a client that allows for multiple accounts, and
you
> have one account registered to one WAN port, and one to a secondary WAN
> port.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Picher
> Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 6:58 AM
> To: sipXecs developer discussions
> Subject: Re: [sipx-dev] Server Behind NAT :: one IP only
>
>
>
> Well, technically if you are in a fail-over type situation and you have a
> login type sip trunk provider your login should start using the other
route.
>
>
>
> Or, if you use a login type SIP trunk and a static IP type SIP trunk could
> you route the two difference scenarios out different internet connections
> based on destination address with the firewall? A login type SIP trunk
does
> not require you to map traffic. Actually, that might not work if one of
> those needs a 1:1 nat. Ok, 2 login type SIP trunks would probably work.
>
>
>
> In fact, with a static IP type SIP trunk you need to do 1:1 nat to an
> outside IP in the firewall... I don't see how this type of connection
would
> work with only a single IP on the sipXecs box... that brings up the whole
> multiple network card type problem.
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Tony Graziano <
[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Right, but my use case was a simple system with dual wan. Seems like a
> lot to go through (second sipx install or sbc install) to use a second
> wan port fully, and it only affects remote users.
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Michael Picher <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think it's a good thing to think about but you could possibly use
>> sipXbridge as well as a third party SBC to do the same thing (or two
third
>> party SBC's of course).
>> I'm just sayin, if the SIP trunks are that important off-board SBC's are
a
>> good idea anyway.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Tony Graziano
> <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Does it make sense to look at being able to provide more than one IP
>>> in this field at some point in the future? Use case is as follows:
>>>
>>> Firewall with dual WAN. Sip trunk registers out each WAN, successfully
>>> registers and places, receives calls. One trunk can fail to the other
>>> trunk.
>>>
>>> Remote users successfully register, but cannot load balance or
>>> failover to second WAN since the server behind nat would have to be
>>> changed/services restarted in order to fully utilize dual wan's.
>>>
>>> It is very customary for us to use multiple providers in a small
>>> business setup. We simply find that putting up a second instance of
>>> sipx "only" for this is sometimes more involved than it should be.
>>>
>>> Server behind NAT: primary public IP 1.2.3.4, secondary public IP
2.3.4.5
>>>
>>> I might also suspect with mongo this could be shared/replicated as a
>>> pool between multiple servers.
>>>
>>> Does this make sense to discuss and look at an enhancement request to
>>> anyone besides me?
>>>
>>> --
>>> ======================
>>> Tony Graziano, Manager
>>> Telephone: 434.984.8430
>>> sip: [email protected]
>>> Fax: 434.326.5325
>>>
>>> Email: [email protected]
>>>
>>> LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
>>> Telephone: 434.984.8426
>>> sip: [email protected]
>>>
>>> Helpdesk Contract Customers:
>>> http://support.myitdepartment.net
>>> Blog:
>>> http://blog.myitdepartment.net
>>>
>>> Linked-In Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Picher
>> eZuce
>> Director of Technical Services
>> O.978-296-1005 X2015 <tel:978-296-1005%20X2015>
>> M.207-956-0262
>> @mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher>
>> www.ezuce.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sipx-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ======================
> Tony Graziano, Manager
> Telephone: 434.984.8430
> sip: [email protected]
> Fax: 434.326.5325
>
> Email: [email protected]
>
> LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
> Telephone: 434.984.8426
> sip: [email protected]
>
> Helpdesk Contract Customers:
> http://support.myitdepartment.net
> Blog:
> http://blog.myitdepartment.net
>
> Linked-In Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev/
>
>
>
>
> --
> Michael Picher
> eZuce
> Director of Technical Services
> O.978-296-1005 X2015
> M.207-956-0262
> @mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher>
> www.ezuce.com
>
> _____
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3742 - Release Date: 07/03/11
>
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev/

Reply via email to