So comments marked DM>>  where 3 options are discussed.

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 7:24 AM
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

 

Douglas Hubler <[email protected]> wrote on 25-05-2012 11:01:14:

> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 2:59 AM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> then we should make sure webmin works.  Did you typically install
> >> webmin on sipxecs systems before or just thinking ahead?
> >
> > I think it is important that there is at least also a UC interface
where
> > the important things for the UC system can be set. Like certain DHCP
> > options.
> 
> yes, agree.
> 
> >> The DNS doesn't have to be the same that your entire company uses.
I
> >> cannot find a good reason not to run the DNS.
> >
> > IP address management is a reason why the "company DNS" should at
least
> > reflect
> > the A records of IP addresses that are used.
> 
> yes, a common setup is to copy records (A or SRV) records from the
> sipxecs system for SIP and IM to your company DNS server.  sipxecs
> maintains it's own DNS because "everything is a DNS issue" and sipxecs
> breaks horribly all the time when we rely on company DNS server to be
> correct.  In addition the number of records we require now for a HA
> system has exploded because a lot more services are HA now.  If before
> copying the "RR" records was problematic, now it's 10x worse.  The
> silly thing is that these records were only used internally by sipxecs
> so why make admins go thru the torture. Funny thing is this hasn't
> changed much from 4.4, but it wasn't clear before that this is
> actually what happened. 

So we have 2 usertypes: 
- the UC client devices, these are mainly hardphones and softphones on
any OS. 
These need access to the SIP SRV records etc. 
Since the world is moving more and more to software I think in bigger
installations 
these should run from the "company DNS". 
- the UC servers, these need a separate set of DNS records, only used
between them. 
These can be provided by the "UC DNS". 

There are then 3 options: 

 

DM>> There may be a 2b)

 

1) Use UC DNS for servers and UC clients, this would mean that the UC
clients only need the standard 
UC records or there is a forwarding to the company DNS. There also has
to be a (DHCP) way to point the UC 
clients to the UC DNS instead of the company DNS if it's not the same. 
2) Use UC DNS for the servers and the company DNS for the clients, this
means putting the 
necessary records in the company DNS. All records are available on the
UC servers as well. 
This is the safest I think because the client records are available
everywhere. No changes on DHCP. 



DM>> 2b)Where Clients use company DNS servers to request resolution of
the SIP Domain name, but company DNS servers only forward resolution of
SIP to UC Servers.

DM>> No actual records per se in company DNS.

DM>> Administration of Bind capabilities like Views to manage traffic
flow on a large network, and load balancing is contained within UC
servers.

DM>> All named references to gateways are self contained within UC
servers as well.

DM>> Also ensures a regional proxy server can be set to use its own
local resources and not that of another regional proxy (topologically
far way).

 

3) Use company DNS for all, meaning entering all records in the company
DNS.
This requires special skills and time, but would work OK. 

Do you want all 3 options? 
1) Is a good option if the UC DNS&DHCP is the main DNS/DHCP, webmin
would be nice then as well. 
If there is another company DNS&DHCP then 2) can be used (if wanted in
combination with 1)) 
I am now using option 3), this would be more for the bigger
organisations were everything has 
to be controlled centrally. In the future I might swap to 2) to make
sure the server part is OK. 
1) is not an option because we have a high available fully managed IP
address management solution 
in place for all clients (UC or not UC). 

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


"The information in this electronic mail message is the sender's confidential 
business and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the 
addressee(s). Access to this internet electronic mail message by anyone else is 
unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, 
distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is 
prohibited and may be unlawful."
"The sender believes that this E-mail and any attachments were free of any 
virus, worm, Trojan horse, and/or malicious code when sent. This message and 
its attachments could have been infected during transmission. By reading the 
message and opening any attachments, the recipient accepts full responsibility 
for taking protective and remedial action about viruses and other defects. The 
sender's employer is not liable for any loss or damage arising in any way from 
this message or its attachments."
"In connection with representing sellers and/or buyers in real estate 
transactions, Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage real estate sales 
associates have absolutely no authority to create binding contractual 
obligations on behalf of a seller or on behalf of a buyer via any written or 
verbal communications including, but not limited to email communications." 
[v1.0.07.109]
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

Reply via email to