i wonder how easy it would be to (1) pull the list of extensions off your pbx and throw them in an excel sheet (or something) (2) use this list to generate a bunch of insert statements for the users table in sipxconfig (3) use same list & sip passwords to generate cli statements for patton
the only lame thing about this is you would have to get an intern or something to manually click on each user and hit "apply" so the requisite config files get generated. On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Scott Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 09:05 +0200, Massimo Vignone wrote: >> milosz wrote: >> > you can have the patton route the calls directly to the second gateway >> > (instead of going through sipx). not sure if that's what you want. i >> > believe there is an example of it in the smartware manual. >> > >> >> Yes, this is what I've already done, but in a large organization, with >> several traditional pbxs, doing this way could be a nightmare, because >> you have t manage all direct connections between gateways. The goal is >> to have the simplest configuration on the gateway, and use Sipx as a >> glue between traditional pbxs and/or PSTN. This way I could cut down >> costs, eliminating the need for directed connections between pbxs and >> dedicated PRI interfaces to the PSTN. >> >> > the other thing you could do is create a user for the 200 extension in >> > sipx and have the 4960 register it (like with an fxs user). then the >> > call routing through sipx will work. i can send you an example if you >> > tell me what release of the firmware you are running. >> > >> >> thanks, but this is not the best way to do that: the gateway is >> connected to pbxs with hundreds of extensions, so it is not confortable >> to create users on the gateway for all of them... >> >> > again, this is stuff you can email [email protected] about, i have >> > found them to be very helpful. >> > >> >> I know, but I don't need examples in Smartware configuration: the point >> is to understand why sipx need authentication when it routes call >> between gateways, even if rules in the dial plan are set with no >> particular permission, and if there is a way to bypass/disable >> authentication. > > If there is no permission required by the dial plan _and_ the identity > in the From header of the gateway-to-gateway request does _not_ match > that of a sipXecs user, then sipXecs will not challenge the call for > authentication. > > NOTE WELL: this leaves you open to hijacking - anyone who can get a SIP > INVITE message onto your network can use your gateway to make any call > they like. I tell you from experience that this can get expensive > _very_ quickly. Setting up PSTN gateway dial rules with no permission > is NOT RECOMMENDED, but it's the only way to do what you're asking > without changing configuration of the gateways. > > If you can get the gateway between your legacy pbx and sipXecs to > authenticate itself (that is, configure a user in sipXecs for the > gateway and put those credentials in the gateway) it would be much > better. Note that the user you configure does _not_ need to be the same > as the identity in the From header for this to work. The From header > can be the extension on the other pbx and the user the gateway > authenticates as can be something else entirely - sipXecs doesn't care; > all it wants is an identity that has the permission required by the dial > plan. This is a _much_ better approach than removing the permission. > > > > _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
