Hi all,
I just want to share the test result for interconnection 2 sipXecs, each
server behind separate NAT and each server with their own domain. I used two
scenarios and both scenarios worked.

First scenario. I set up using "interconnect_two_sipX_PBXs" documentation
(http://sipx-wiki.calivia.com/index.php/HowTo_interconnect_two_sipX_PBXs),
with NAT traversal enable at both server. For gateway configuration, I setup
using "unmanaged gateway". The address for gateway I used DNS SRV address
(domain name), if I setup using IP address or Fully qualified hostname, I
was unable to call remote gateway extension.

Second scenario, I setup one of the server as and ITSP, just like Ranga
explained in the previous email.

ITSP sipXecs server configuration:

1. I setup the ITSP sipXecs server one user extension for the remote server
(ext.300)
2. I enable NAT traversal at the ITSP sipXecs.

Remote sipXecs server configuration:
I setup the server just like "SIP Trunking: sipXbridge Overview and
Configuration" documentation
(http://sipx-wiki.calivia.com/index.php/SipXbridge_Overview_and_Configuratio
n), with some-modifications:
1. at step 5. "Specify a Trunking Gateway with a Route pointing to
SipXbridge". I setup just like unmanage gateway, I used DNS SRV for the
gateway address, if I setup using IP address or fully qualified hostname,
the called never worked.
2. at step 6. "Configure an ITSP account that is managed by SipXbridge", for
ITSP server domain name, I put the only the domain name part
(mycompany.net), but at ITSP server address, I used fully qualify domain
name (voip.mycompany.net). If I used only the domain part, the call never
worked. And then for the username and password, I used the username and
password that I created in the ITSP server (ext.300).
3. Still at the ITSP account page, with "Used public address for call setup"
enable or disable, both option still worked.

With the configuration above I was able to call the other ITSP extension
(ext.200) using the dial plan I setup for the gateway. And for the other
ITSP user extension (ext.200) to call the the remote server, just dialed the
remote server extension (ext.300) and the call will straight to the
operator.

Sorry for my bad English :)

Regards,
B. Aidil


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Lawrence [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 9:25 PM
> To: Boy Aidil Sjam
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Interconnection 2 sipXecs - solved
> 
> On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 10:03 -0400, Scott Lawrence wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 17:22 +0700, Boy Aidil Sjam wrote:
> > > Hi Scott,
> > > I solved the problem.
> > > Early, I configured the gateway using full hostname.domain.name to
> the other
> > > gateway, even changed the address with IP address, but the result
> still the
> > > same.
> > > Then after I changed the gateway address using SRV, suddenly it
> work.
> >
> > I'm not sure I followed that, but if you like it...
> >
> > > Well, I think that's why sipXecs very dependent with DNS SRV.
> >
> > DNS SRV is the primary mechanism for HA.
> >
> >
> > > Next step, testing between 2 server with both server behind NAT.
> >
> > If you mean putting each server behind a different NAT, that is not
> > something that we've tested at all, and it's not a supported
> > configuration.
> 
> Sorry - I may be getting my threads mixed up.
> 
> What isn't supported or tested is having two members of an HA cluster
> behind two different NATs.  If what you have is two different systems
> (different SIP domain names) configured to talk to each other via
> site-to-site links, being behind two different NATs can be made to work
> (with the usual NAT hassles, of course).
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.364 / Virus Database: 270.12.64/2170 - Release Date:
> 06/11/09 17:59:00



DISCLAIMER:
Information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It 
is intended solely for the addressees. Access to this message by anyone else is 
unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, 
or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in 
reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact 
the sender if you have received this message in error.

_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list [email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/

Reply via email to