In this config are you talking about the Ingate SIParator or Ingate Firewall. Sounds like what I want to do!
Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Graziano [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 5:47 PM > To: Picher, Michael > Cc: Andrew Cotter; Todd Hodgen; Sipx-users list > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] One last attempt - AT&T IP Flex > > It's nice not running trunking on the server and using an > independent device. You can make sipx dialplan changes and > restart services without interfering with a call in progress. > > With our typical ingate configuration, ETH1 gets a public IP > address, ETH0 gets an ip on the same subnet as the sipx > system. Assuming your phones are on a separate vlan, it works > very well. > > Since the ingate can accept both trunking and remote users on > port 5060, you don't have any extra work in configuring DNS > or an out of the ordinary proxy configuration. > > Remote users with FTP to their "home" server for voice are > also supportable using polycom phones, though safefguards > should be applied. We do this all the time and have very good results. > > We also would be able to configure it to support multi-site > dialing plans (one system to another) without adding the > siptrunking role to sipx. Makes it very tidy. > > Ingates are small, and have flash drives for reliability, low > power consumption and so forth. > > On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Picher, Michael > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm with everyone else and recommending Ingates at this point for > > flexibility / reliability. > > > > Mike > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] [mailto:sipx-users- > >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrew Cotter > >> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 4:02 PM > >> To: 'Todd Hodgen'; 'Sipx-users list' > >> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] One last attempt - AT&T IP Flex > >> > >> 15 in FL are not that big of a deal. Only 4-5 maybe use > the phones > >> significantly. The site is a warehouse mostly so there are people > >> receiving equipment, auditing, testing, packing, and > shipping. Most > >> calls by > > the > >> warehouse staff are internal. The rest are in sales and a > moderate > >> phone users. > >> > >> They are typically in the mid 50-60 ms ping time. > >> > >> I don't know of any other AT&T trunk offering. Been using > flowroute > > in > >> AZ > >> for a while on asterisk which has worked really well. > >> > >> Andrew > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Todd Hodgen [mailto:[email protected]] > >> > Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 3:51 PM > >> > To: 'Andrew Cotter'; 'Sipx-users list' > >> > Subject: RE: [sipx-users] One last attempt - AT&T IP Flex > >> > > >> > You may be able to get out of those contracts if they > can't provide > >> > the provisioning that you need, and it really is quite > >> simple. > >> > > >> > Sounds like you just need SIP trunks really. There are > several on > >> > this list that provide SIP trunks from other providers that have > >> > been certified to work with sipXecs, which would make > life simpler > >> > for you, and potentially save you the cost of additional > hardware. > >> > > >> > If your traffic is staying on net with AT&T, I would > think trying > >> > some sipx to sipx calls between two locations might be a > good judge > >> > of the type of service you will get across those links. > You could > >> > run Ping Plotter between two locations as well to see how much > >> > delay runs between them for a good understanding of the > underlying > >> > network. > >> > > >> > BTW, the 15 users in Florida would be a concern for me over a > >> > single T-1 unless you are running some compression on > those calls, > >> > assuming you run general internet traffic over that circuit also. > >> > > >> > Does AT&T offer other SIP trunks that are not part of their IP > >> > Perplex, maybe IP non-Flex that is simpler and more configurable? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Andrew Cotter [mailto:[email protected]] > >> > Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 12:31 PM > >> > To: 'Todd Hodgen'; 'Sipx-users list' > >> > Subject: RE: [sipx-users] One last attempt - AT&T IP Flex > >> > > >> > "BTW, IP FLEX doesn't seem to have much FLEX." - That made me > >> > chuckle! > >> > > >> > Why AT&T? They are providing our internet at all 4 sites. > >> > We have a dozen or so home office types as well, but I am not > >> > concerned with them as of yet. > >> > We are in contract with AT&T, but I have already spoken with the > >> > sales rep that I may want to drop IP Flex at the two smaller > >> > locations where it has not been installed yet. > >> > Fiber at HQ with 60 users > >> > T1 in FL - 15 users > >> > T1 in AZ - 5 users > >> > T1 in IL - 3 users > >> > > >> > No MPLS between sites, but IP Flex is supposed to allow > for on-net > >> > calling between sites. This lets AT&T handle the QoS > without the > >> > cost to us for MPLS. Not much site-to-site calling is going on, > >> > but some is. > >> > > >> > HQ is the only site I have tried SipX with and it is the most > >> > complex by far. Our datacenter is also at HQ. Network is ok > >> > internally and calls route as expected. Separate VLAN for our > >> > network internally for the phones, Cisco SIP handoff, Audiocodes > >> > MP118, and SipX. > >> > > >> > Would people suggest not getting IP Flex at the smaller > locations > >> > and run SIP over IPSEC VPN tunnels between CT and AZ/IL? > Not much > >> > QoS on the public internet, but AT&T circuits on both ends so I > >> > might have a better shot with this. > >> > > >> > I can go into more detail if it would help. > >> > > >> > Andrew > >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: Todd Hodgen [mailto:[email protected]] > >> > > Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 3:13 PM > >> > > To: 'Andrew Cotter'; 'Sipx-users list' > >> > > Subject: RE: [sipx-users] One last attempt - AT&T IP Flex > >> > > > >> > > If you could explain your network in more detail, there may > >> > be several > >> > > solutions. > >> > > > >> > > For instance, Is AT&T providing an MPLS network to connect > >> > these sites > >> > > together? Could you use site to site dialing, and then use a > >> > > different provider for the SIP trunks over the MPLS network? > >> > > > >> > > IS there a contractual reason why you have to use AT&T, or is > >> > > that just a preference you have. There are many other > providers > >> > that can > >> > > support standard sip. > >> > > > >> > > BTW, IP FLEX doesn't seem to have much FLEX. > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: [email protected] > >> > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > > Andrew > >> > > Cotter > >> > > Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 12:06 PM > >> > > To: 'Sipx-users list' > >> > > Subject: [sipx-users] One last attempt - AT&T IP Flex > >> > > > >> > > So I have finally gotten word from AT&T labs that they > will not > >> > > be able to support SipX and fix our transfer issue. > >> > > > >> > > We have a SIP handoff that is direct (switch in the middle) > >> > from their > >> > > Cisco router onsite. I asked for them to send signaling on > >> > port 5080 > >> > > (sipXbridge) but that was a no go. > >> > > Then I asked if they can do some sort of NAT translation > >> > for incoming > >> > > data from their end, through the router, and into port > >> > 5080. Again, > >> > > no go as they tested this in the labs. > >> > > B2BUA on the Cisco, nope. > >> > > > >> > > So... I am left with probably having to leave my sipX > setup, that > > I > >> > > have come to know and love, behind. > >> > > > >> > > A final question for the masses: > >> > > > >> > > Would having AT&T swap out the SIP handoff for a PRI handoff > >> > > potentially fix my transfer issues if I put a gateway in? If > >> > > this would work and I can convince AT&T to convert the SIP > >> > handoff to a PRI > >> > > handoff, what solution would you suggest (patton, > >> > audiocodes, etc.) to > >> > > handle a single PRI. I have > >> > > 4 sites spread throughout the US and would need something > >> > fairly cost > >> > > effective for 2 of them since there are 5 or less employees > >> > at those > >> > > sites. > >> > > I am sure I will have more questions if people come back > >> > saying this > >> > > might resolve the issues. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Parting thoughts. > >> > > In light of the position I am now in I am forced to > begin to look > >> > > elsewhere at commercial products. I wanted to share > my thoughts > > on > >> > > the comparison of sipx and a well known commercial product > >> > out there. > >> > > After getting a demo of one solution that the salesperson > >> > was touting > >> > > as an extremely easy interface, so simple a cave man can > >> > set it up, I > >> > > was amazed at how much I was left desiring the > simplicity of SipX. > >> > > The screens were cluttered, the interface was fairly well > >> > organized, > >> > > but the voicemail and admin console still resided on a windows > >> > > machine. Not what I want. > >> > > > >> > > Yes it was a nice system in terms of failover and distribution, > > but > >> > > they pretty much insist that we swap out our phones > (polycom) for > >> > > their own phones. Also, for a VoIP system they almost left me > >> > > speechless when they said I could only use one SIP > trunk provider > >> > > unless I bought an InGate. > >> > > VoIP... SIP... Won't support it? Wow! Don't even get me > >> > started on > >> > > the Windows application or the Outlook piece that I repeatedly > > told > >> > > them we would not be using. > >> > > > >> > > Thank you again for everyone's help and suggestions > over the past > >> > > month in trying to make this work. If I can slip in a plug for > > the > >> > > project during my talk at the Computerworld OSBC later > this week > >> > > I will. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > 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/ > > > > > > -- > ====================== > Tony Graziano, Manager > Telephone: 434.984.8430 > Fax: 434.984.8431 > > Email: [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/
