"And hence the need for a really smart SBC for remote user traversal,
because you will not have access to every firewall where they are. "

 

Any recommendations?

 

"You are assuming that the ITSP's are capable of talking to sipxbridge.
This is another VERY good reason to use an independent sbc. "

 

We have been using/testing a SipX 4.1.7 for almost a year now with one
ITSP (MyDivert.com) and it is working so far. We have recently started a
new 4.2.1 installation we are configuring for production and so far have
not had any NAT traversal issues but I do understand we have not tested
all the possible scenarios, nor could we possibly ever do that before
putting it in production. Though, I'd like to try to cover as many bases
as possible.

 

 

Thanks again! (I noticed that your located in Charlottesvile and I'm
Fredericksburg, maybe I could buy you a beer and pick your brain some
more???)

 

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony
Graziano
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 2:26 PM
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] OpenSBC

 

 

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Burleigh, Matt
<[email protected]> wrote:

"When you use an SBC that does smart nat traversal methods (if they have
sip alg or Stateful packet inspection on) or if they have a integrated
device it might not leave the option to turn onn these functions, how
useful will it be to you?"

 

And that's why I thought I would be only using Bria where I can
provision "Firewall Traversal" method to be OFF (or Bria Iphone with
firewall traversal options off) and let SipXbridge handle the NAT
traversal issues.

It doesn't work that way.

 

        So a smarter SBC, like OpenSBC, would support more NAT traversal
scenarios? If this is so, then I need to start learning a lot more about
OpenSBC and SipX.

Not all SBC's are the same.  

         

        My user base is pretty small, less than 10 would be globally
roaming and need this type of connectivity.

And hence the need for a really smart SBC for remote user traversal,
because you will not have access to every firewall where they are. 

         

        No site to site VPNs. Instead we're simply using ITSPs to
provide DID's for our customers in other countries and so that it's a
"local" call for the customers.

You are assuming that the ITSP's are capable of talking to sipxbridge.
This is another VERY good reason to use an independent sbc. 

         

        Thanks again!

         

         

        From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony
Graziano
        Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 1:13 PM
        To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software

        
        Subject: Re: [sipx-users] OpenSBC

         

        You might get more input if you start another thread.

         

        I've done this before. Trunks on other continents, site-to-site
vpn's with analog gateways on other continents, remote users wherever.

         

        It's not a reflection on pfSense, but if you want to support
remote "mobile" workers and/or a lot of remote users, you need a
different SBC device than sipxbridge.

         

        Yes, it will work. Yes it will traverse NAT (to a point). 

         

        What it wont do is traverse NAT in anything other than a basic
way, which means you need to reconfigure the remote firewalls of just
about every user, to get it to work for them. When you use an SBC that
does smart nat traversal methods (if they have sip alg or Stateful
packet inspection on) or if they have a integrated device it might not
leave the option to turn onn these functions, how useful will it be to
you?

        On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Burleigh, Matt
<[email protected]> wrote:

        I am planning a Pfsense/SipX deployment with both roaming/global
remote workers(Bria Pro/Bria Iphone) and ITSP (DID's in other countries)
connectivity. 

         

        Sorry to hijack this thread, but I am not sure I understand the
need for OpenSBC or any external SBC with SipX. SipXbridge already
handles the NAT traversal issue and is an "SBC" of sorts. I guess I
don't if it's a complete "SBC" implementation or not...

         

        Are there security issues for allowing "port forwared"
connections directly to SipXbridge?

         

        I think  I've read a thread discussing using OpenSBC to modify
the SIP messages and not sure why that is needed? Any examples?

         

        Thanks!

         

        From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael
Picher
        Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 10:07 AM
        To: [email protected]; Discussion list for users of sipXecs
software
        Subject: Re: [sipx-users] OpenSBC

         

        two thumbs up for OpenSBC on pfSense!
        
        freeswitch is already available on pfSense, how hard can it be
Joegen :-)
        
        i'm sure you're not busy doing anything else...  hahahaha...

        On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 5:16 PM, [email protected]
<[email protected]> wrote:

        > If you feel that integration would do the sipX project any
good,
        > feel free to voice out your opinion.

        I'm not high level enough in this to have any input on the
topic. I don't know if that would or would not be a good idea in terms
of 'integrating'.
        I personally like to see things in modular form, not all tied
into one single bundle but tied together so that they work very well
together, as individual, stand alone 'modules'.
        
        I loved using OpenSBC but was never able to resolve the glemlins
we suffered. I still believe it was because of my lack of understanding
Vyatta so had to move to pfsense. What I can tell you is how badly I
would love to see OpenSBC on pfsense though :). Or, even as a safe,
secure centos/firewall only setup.
        
        Mike

        
        
        
        _______________________________________________
        sipx-users mailing list
        [email protected]
        List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

        
        
        
        -- 
        There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand
binary and those who don't.
        
        [email protected]
        blog: http://www.sipxecs.info
        call: sip:[email protected]
<mailto:sip%[email protected]> 

        
        _______________________________________________
        sipx-users mailing list
        [email protected]
        List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

        
        
        
        -- 
        ======================
        Tony Graziano, Manager
        Telephone: 434.984.8430
        sip: [email protected]
        Fax: 434.326.5325
        
        Email: [email protected]
        
        LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
        Telephone: 434.984.8426
        sip: [email protected]
        
        Helpdesk Contract Customers:
        http://support.myitdepartment.net

         

        Blog:

        http://blog.myitdepartment.net

         

        Linked-In Profile:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4

         

        
        _______________________________________________
        sipx-users mailing list
        [email protected]
        List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/




-- 
======================
Tony Graziano, Manager
Telephone: 434.984.8430
sip: [email protected]
Fax: 434.326.5325

Email: [email protected]

LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
Telephone: 434.984.8426
sip: [email protected]

Helpdesk Contract Customers:
http://support.myitdepartment.net

 

Blog:

http://blog.myitdepartment.net

 

Linked-In Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4

 

_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

Reply via email to