VLANs are separate networks, just on the same physical hardware. If one 
of your networks doesn't know a route to the other network how are they 
supposed to communicate?

Josh Patten
Assistant Network Administrator
Brazos County IT Dept.
(979) 361-4676


On 1/25/2010 11:51 AM, Andrew Cotter wrote:
> 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/

Reply via email to