Happy New Year! 4.6 will bring interesting challenges and opportunities next year!
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Tony Graziano < [email protected]> wrote: > easier for you to say first in your timezone! > > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Joegen Baclor <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Happy 2012 everyone! >> >> >> On 12/30/2011 11:33 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> > I think everyone has made their point and it is time to move on. >> > >> > Thanks to all who contributed to the project in 2011. Hopefully we can >> > expand that list in 2012 and make this an even better project! >> > >> > Sincerely, >> > Dave Deutschman >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: [email protected] >> > [mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] >> On Behalf Of >> > [email protected] >> > Sent: Friday, December 30, 2011 7:22 AM >> > To: sipx-users >> > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> > >> > On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 02:37:37 -0800, Todd Hodgen wrote: >> > > Mike, contrary to what you say here, I specifically am not sure what >> a >> > > VPRI is, and yes, after your sigh response, I Googled it and tried to >> > > find a definition of what it was exactly. >> > >> > As I already said, it is not a term being used, I just figured it would >> not >> > drop into all this nonsense to use it and that the pros in this list >> would >> > easily know what I'm talking about. >> > >> > > With a telco background, PRI is very specific to me. VPRI could be >> > > one of many things, and I really was asking what it was in the frame >> > > of your questions. It wasn't meant to be condescending, and if it >> was, I >> > apologize. >> > >> > Of course there are condescending attitudes on this list, it's been >> here for >> > the many years I've been on it and it's usually from the same people. >> Then >> > those same people defend themselves saying how there is no such >> behavior. >> > But of course, the same folks who jump into the stupid thread are long >> time >> > members who never suffer that crap so how would you know how it feels. >> You >> > then call it ribbing each other, bullshit. I'd much prefer NEVER >> getting a >> > reply to my questions unless they came without the condescending >> attitudes. >> > >> > The only defense some can make is 'sometimes it hurts'??? Give me a >> break, >> > learning is difficult at times but it certainly should not come with >> being >> > insulted. Practically every time I post something, replies come from the >> > same people and always with the same condescending tones explaining how >> I >> > used the wrong term or didn't provide enough information, etc etc. I've >> said >> > countless times, this is not my day job like it is most of you here. I >> can >> > figure most things out and sometimes comes a situation where I either >> have a >> > problem or sure could use some input from the pros who are doing this >> full >> > time. Asking a question here is like throwing the dice, it's a chance >> of not >> > asking a question correctly and being insulted for it. >> > >> > > VPRI has nothing to do with me, and apparently is not something that >> > > anyone knows anything about, except the company marketing with that >> > > name, so I will not respond further on this thread. >> > >> > Of course you know what a VPRI is, almost anyone reading this thread >> will. >> > And those that aren't into the head games will simply ask 'can you tell >> me >> > what a vpri means, does it mean a virtual pri perhaps' and walk away >> > learning something. There is no need to be anal in a mailing list. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: [email protected] >> > > [mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] >> On Behalf Of >> > > [email protected] >> > > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 8:13 PM >> > > To: sipx-users >> > > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> > > >> > >> Sigh what? Mike, read about PRI - >> > >> >> > > Sigh... because you took the time to agree with Tony, giving me grief >> > > while at the same time pointing out that you were not doing that. Of >> > > course you were. Since Tony had already made his point, why did you >> > > need to bring it up again? >> > > >> > > You then post a separate reply to the original question when just >> > > before that, you told me you didn't know what I was talking about. >> > > >> > > Sigh because as soon as I point out the obvious such as I am now >> > > having to do, a few of you must at all costs have fun with this, >> > > turning the persons post into garbage making points like 'we need to >> > > understand'. Does someone else feel the need still? >> > > >> > > Of course you know what I was asking about, I've seen plenty of >> people >> > > talking about virtual PRI's. Who the heck would not know that a VPRI >> > > might simply be an abbreviation. Doesn't seem to be at the moment but >> > > give it time maybe :). >> > > >> > > Bottom line is that there are a few old timers on this list that seem >> > > to feel the need to be hard nosed to people. Why? Maybe a few of the >> > > users are simply too freaking serious for no good reason. Give it a >> > > rest. There is no reason to be like that with ANYONE on this list. >> > > No one makes you reply to anything, you don't have to. If you don't >> > > like how someone posts something, it's not your place to be the >> > > teacher or know it all and tell them how they need to learn >> everything >> > > about VoIP before ever taking the chance of using the wrong term >> while >> > > asking a question. God forbid! >> > > >> > >> That's all I'm saying, and I think that is what Tony was asking - >> > >> what is it exactly. >> > >> >> > > A virtual PRI is really just a billing method for a SIP trunk. >> Figured >> > > pretty much anyone on this list would know that. >> > > The question really was, how do I set up sipx so that I can use IP >> > > authentication to the ITSP over user/password. >> > > >> > > Anyways, moving on... >> > > >> > > >> > >> -----Original Message----- >> > >> From: [email protected] >> > >> [mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] >> On Behalf Of >> > >> [email protected] >> > >> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 7:08 PM >> > >> To: sipx-users >> > >> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> > >> >> > >> <sigh> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:55:11 -0800, Todd Hodgen wrote: >> > >>> Yes, but what is a virtual PRI? Since PRI is an ISDN standard, >> what is >> > >> the >> > >>> non-standard derivative that comes out of a Virtual PRI? What is >> it >> > >>> exactly? >> > >>> >> > >>> Is it maybe a PRI that is fed out of device that is actually fed >> via >> > >>> a >> > >>> T1 >> > >>> with SIP trunks on it? If it is, its still a PRI, conforming to >> the >> > >>> PRI >> > >>> standards, as it should. >> > >>> >> > >>> I believe what you are referring to is some companies marketing >> name >> > >>> they use for a service they provide. I don't think anyone is >> giving >> > >>> you grief, we just have no idea what you are talking about since we >> > >>> haven't had the pleasure of reading the material you have, and >> > >>> really haven't a clue what this VPRI is. >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> -----Original Message----- >> > >>> From: [email protected] >> > >>> [mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] >> On Behalf Of >> > >>> [email protected] >> > >>> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 3:02 PM >> > >>> To: sipx-users >> > >>> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> > >>> >> > >>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:20:57 -0500, Tony Graziano wrote: >> > >>>> I dont know VPRI means. If you use terms noone but you might >> > >>>> understand you might explain it a bit. Throwing that aside... >> > >>>> >> > >>> When I don't use the right terms, I get grief and when I use the >> > >>> terms I'm seeing in docs, I still get grief :). >> > >>> I would have called it Virtual PRI but flowroute itself seems to >> > >>> call it VPRI for short. >> > >>> >> > >>>> flowroute is a two-edged sword: Use the bandwidth.com template >> and >> > >>>> change the bandwidth.com gateway stuff to your flowroute gateway. >> > >>>> make sure flowroute is swet to send to your ip address and port >> 5080. >> > >>>> Very >> > >>> simple. >> > >>> >> > >>> I'll take a look at this. >> > >>> >> > >>>> If you use dual wan with flowroute you may have issues if you >> route >> > >>>> netblocks or providers via specific wan ports. >> > >>>> >> > >>> Flowroute will be the only gateway these sipx servers will know and >> > >>> have. >> > >>> >> > >>>> flowroute does not control >> > >>>> the majority of their network and hence, RTP does not come from >> the >> > >>>> same IP as the gateway. You pretty much have to open everything to >> > >>>> use flowroute if you had been in locked down mode. >> > >>>> >> > >>> I didn't know this about them and to date, have always used an IP >> > >>> allow rule for them. >> > >>> Guess I've been lucky, haven't heard of any missed calls. >> > >>> >> > >>> These servers won't have any remote users but I wanted to have a >> bit >> > >>> of security in place so figured I would block all but >> > >>> sip.flowroute.com. Now I seem to have a new problem. >> > >>> >> > >>> Mike >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 5:10 PM, [email protected] >> > >>>> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> >> > >>>> wrote: >> > >>>>> I need to install 4 separate sipx systems in four separate >> > >>>>> locations. >> > >>>>> No interoffice communications. >> > >>>> All of the sipx systems could benefit from the use of a VPRI >> rather >> > >>>> than traditional. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> I use ITSP's for individual lines when we need an area code that >> > >>>> our local telco cannot handle. >> > >>>> On sipx, I usually just create an ITSP device in the gateway >> > >>>> section and let it authenticate via user name/password. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> In this case, due to the number of lines per server (4 to 8), it >> > >>>> doesn't seem like a good idea to authenticate each and every DID >> > >>>> individually for example and would prefer using an IP based >> > >>>> authentication for the whole server. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>> I'll be using flowroute for the systems but am not sure how to >> > >>>>> configure sipx to authenticate once based on IP over a user >> > >>>>> name/password. I don't see anything which would allow me to do >> > >>>>> this in the Gateway configuration section. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>>> Can someone shed some light on this please. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>> Thanks very much. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Mike >> > >>>> >> > >>>> _______________________________________________ >> > >>>> sipx-users mailing list >> > >>>> [email protected] >> > >>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> > >>> _______________________________________________ >> > >>> sipx-users mailing list >> > >>> [email protected] >> > >>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> sipx-users mailing list >> > >> [email protected] >> > >> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > sipx-users mailing list >> > > [email protected] >> > > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> > _______________________________________________ >> > sipx-users mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> > ----- >> > No virus found in this message. >> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> > Version: 2012.0.1901 / Virus Database: 2109/4711 - Release Date: >> 12/29/11 >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > sipx-users mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sipx-users mailing [email protected] >> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: 434.465.6833 > > Email: [email protected] > > LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk: > Telephone: 434.984.8426 > sip: [email protected] > > Helpdesk Customers: http://myhelp.myitdepartment.net > Blog: http://blog.myitdepartment.net > > Linked-In Profile: > http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-graziano/14/4a6/7a4 > Ask about our Internet Fax services! > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > -- Michael Picher, Director of Technical Services eZuce, Inc. 300 Brickstone Square**** Suite 201**** Andover, MA. 01810 O.978-296-1005 X2015 M.207-956-0262 @mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher> www.ezuce.com
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
