We can add the route, but won't the vlan issue also stop me from gaining access?
Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: Josh Patten [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 12:46 PM > To: Andrew Cotter > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Vlan question > > Do you have any routing going on between those subnets? If > not, that might be a good place to start. If those switches > have routing capabilities built in then I would utilize them. > > Josh Patten > Assistant Network Administrator > Brazos County IT Dept. > (979) 361-4676 > > > On 1/25/2010 11:40 AM, Andrew Cotter wrote: > > Matt - Congrats on the success! > > > > Our system is up and running, but we have an issue with > vlans it looks like. > > Any suggested deployment configurations/examples would be > great when > > it comes to networks. Sorry now if this is a dumb question! > > > > Are layout is as follows: > > > > Data network = 10.0.0.0/17 > > Data vlan = 10 > > Voice network = 172.21.210.0/24 > > Voice vlan = 210 > > > > The Cisco 7940/60 phones have the voice vlan hard coded in > them to 210 > > which means the untagged data coming from the second port on their > > switch will put traffic on the data (10) vlan. Switch ports with > > phones are specified as trunk ports with data (10) being > the native vlan and voice (210) also added. > > This works for phones and subsequently connected computers > correctly. > > > > The issue we are having is the port on the switch where > sipx connects. > > The port is currently an access port which means it has > only the voice > > vlan on it and that allows the phones to connect properly, but we > > still have an issue with being able to access the web > interface. Not > > a vlan guru here so I am struggling on what to do. The > switches are > > Juniper EX4200 series and they have the option of tagging > the native > > vlan and then additional vlans if the port is a trunk port > vs. an access port. > > > > If we were to specify the port as trunk port with the > native vlan as > > the voice vlan (210) and add additional vlans of data (10), > will that > > probably work? The opposite way around (native=data) cuts off > > communications between phone and sipx. > > > > Any suggestions here would be much appreciated. Did I > deploy this in > > a totally unusual way? I was modeling the network off of > the way the > > old Cisco callmanager (v 4.2) was setup. > > > > Everyone's feedback thus far has been very helpful! > > > > Thanks, > > > > Andrew > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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/ > > > _______________________________________________ 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/
