It appears your switches have full routing capabilites. If you've given 
IP addresses to each VLAN in your switches perhaps you can just turn IP 
routing on your switches on, set a default route to your internet 
router, and change the gateway in DHCP and on your statically configured 
devices to the switch's IP address. Or if you internet firewall is VLAN 
aware you could add the VLAN in there and let the internet firewall take 
care of the routing.

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


On 1/25/2010 11:54 AM, Josh Patten wrote:
> 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/
>    
_______________________________________________
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