I'm not a developer but find sipXecs better than most packages to maintaining a stable and supportable environment for our sip infrastructure needs. These are my comments, mine alone, and do not reflect those of any other party. Please take them in a friendly and supportive manner.
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Mark Eissler <[email protected]> wrote: > This has got to be one of the most ridiculous limitations I've heard of in > recent times. I'm glad someone mentioned it because it immediately drops > sipx to the bottom of our list as a candidate to replace our trixbox > installation...which lives happily with multiple interfaces. Depends on how security conscious you are (IMO). > > With "Network Admin" hat on: multi-homing servers that are configured to > sit on both public and private networks is as common as dust under a sofa. sipx is not designed to be a firewall. A lot of work goes into the sipxconfig gui, and a lot of developer time would have to go into writing iptables management within sipxconfig to remain consistent with the goal of the project. multihoming changes the overall scope of that in some way. sipx is being designed to offer high availablility features, with proxy and other functions able to take over the functions of a failed or disconnected system. Multihoming would certainly make that less tolerant in some ways. It is not meant to run multiple NIC's, favoring an enterprise facing firewall instead of "being a firewall also". It has its own backup routine and can backup via ftp, there are also methods to backup via smb (cifs). The media functions within sipx are latency sensitive, therefore no development work has gone into SAN or NAS, or supporting multiple nic's. Be aware the media server is being replaced in 4.2, and work towards supporting other features in 5.0 which have not been announced yet. The roadmap will have more. http://sipx-wiki.calivia.com/index.php/Detailed_Roadmap_sipXecs_IP_PBX > If you have a NAS or SAN setup, you've probably got multiple interfaces. If > you pull backups across your network, you've probably got multiple > interfaces. Out of the 30 or so servers we currently have deployed, maybe > two of them have a single interface and they're on the "need to upgrade" > list. > > Wasn't this issue supposed to get fixed for 3.10? > > http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/msg08283.html > > -mark > > > > Andrew Cotter wrote: > >> That is the kind of definitive answer I was looking for! Heading to the >> site in a few to work with the net admin. >> Thanks for the input. Maybe I will end up making the suggestion for >> future releases to allow multiple IPs. :) >> Andrew >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* Tony Graziano [mailto:[email protected]] >> *Sent:* Monday, January 25, 2010 5:03 AM >> *To:* Andrew Cotter >> *Cc:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Multiple IP or NICs on a sipX box >> >> the issue is that six will bind the ips to the proxy. there should >> onlt be one. you should not have 2 ip's on the box, period. >> >> On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Andrew Cotter >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Both subnets reside on the same network. Not beyond a firewall. >> 10. is the >> production data network. >> I think I need to have him add a route and then data vlan on the >> pbx port. >> We are workign with Juniper EX4200 switches which are pretty >> advanced and I >> think we can add the route right in the switches. >> >> Andrew >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Tony Graziano [mailto:[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>] >> > Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2010 1:56 PM >> > To: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>; >> [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Multiple IP or NICs on a sipX box >> > >> > You cannot and should not do this on sipx. Why doesn't your >> > network admin do it in the firewall. >> > ============================ >> > Tony Graziano, Manager >> > Telephone: 434.984.8430 >> > Fax: 434.984.8431 >> > >> > Email: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> > >> > LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk: >> > Telephone: 434.984.8426 >> > Fax: 434.984.8427 >> > >> > Helpdesk Contract Customers: >> > http://www.myitdepartment.net/gethelp/ >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> > <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > To: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > Sent: Sat Jan 23 13:33:18 2010 >> > Subject: [sipx-users] Multiple IP or NICs on a sipX box >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > I am stuck in a situation right now with a network admin >> > insisting on getting a second IP on a sipx box that is on a >> > totally separate subnet. The pbx is in the 172.x.x.x range >> > and the data network is 10.x.x.x land. Right now the box is >> > up and running with about 60 phones an audiocodes mp-118 fxo >> > gateway all on one vlan. I have no way to get to the box to >> > administer it. >> > >> > I tried putting in a second adapter but seemed to cause all >> > sorts of strange issues and I could not get DHCP to respond >> > correctly. One late night with that and I am glad the >> > backup/restore system works well! >> > >> > Would a virtual IP on eth0 be ok? Anyone dealing with this >> > issue? If two subnets cause a significant issue for sipx, I >> > will have to back to the net admin and try to push him on the >> > vlan situation. >> > >> > Any thoughts? >> > >> > >> > Andrew >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > sipx-users mailing list [email protected] >> <mailto:[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/ >> > >> >> >> >> >> -- ====================== >> Tony Graziano, Manager >> Telephone: 434.984.8430 >> Fax: 434.984.8431 >> >> Email: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> >> LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk: >> Telephone: 434.984.8426 >> Fax: 434.984.8427 >> >> Helpdesk Contract Customers: >> http://www.myitdepartment.net/gethelp/ >> >> Why do mathematicians always confuse Halloween and Christmas? >> Because 31 Oct = 25 Dec. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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/ >> > -- > > Portfolio | http://work.mixtur.com > > Blog | http://blog.mixtur.com > > Twitter | @Mixtur > > Mixtur Interactive | http://www.mixtur.com > Marketing Solutions for Growing Companies ~ Plan | Create | Execute > > CONFIDENTIAL OR PROPRIETARY COMMUNICATION: This message, including any > attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient and may contain > confidential or proprietary information of Mixtur Interactive, Inc. Review, > publication, use or distribution of this message, in whole or in part, by an > unintended recipient is prohibited and may be a violation of law. If you > are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail, > delete this message, and destroy any hard copies of this message. > The only real question I saw here was "wasn't this supposed to be addressed in 3.10? No: http://track.sipfoundry.org/browse/XX-4818 states that is was not completely fixed. It is also referenced here: http://track.sipfoundry.org/browse/XX-6146 When you look at http://track.sipfoundry.org/browse/XX-4818 please note that it does not have a fix version or schedule yet. While I myself understand how you feel about this, many others have been able to use an independent firewall or appliance and run sipx internally with "probably better" security results. Also, while you are telling everyone on here how you really feel, perhaps you can take a deep breath and post some queries to both the users and developers lists asking "why" or "when". While the function to multihome (that IS what firewalls, vlans, routers, vpns, etc ARE for) is not present at the moment in sipxecs, I don't think it makes it LESS or a replacement candidate for another system. Every environment is different, with different needs. I don't find TRIXBOX or any * based system high on my list. That's my preference, and I'm free to choose, as you are. At the end of the day, we may have different needs and use different tools to fulfill those needs. At least noon is forcing you to use something you don't want to use. Good luck!
_______________________________________________ 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/
