- VoiceOps - lists.voiceops.org

IPLD Carriers
by BrandonB＠netins.com Oct. 14, 2009

Oct. 14, 2009

We're looking for some additional IPLD carriers and wondered which ones everyone has had good results with. It would be for SIP outbound only U.S. toll and international. Thanks, ---- Brandon Buckner Switching Technician / VoIP Admin Iowa Network Services brandonb at netins.com<mailto:brandonb at netins.com>

5 7

Interesting reading
by hiersd＠gmail.com Oct. 14, 2009

Oct. 14, 2009

Saw this come over on an asterisk group: http://www.honeynor.no/2009/09/20/citibank-uk-number-was-target-for-a-lawnm… David

1 0

Voice Security in MPLS networks -- When is it necessary?
by Guy.Ram＠t-systems.com Oct. 14, 2009

Oct. 14, 2009

Hello, Like your kind response to this question: Would folks agree that for SIP traffic in a private MPLS network should not necessarily require encryption. What is your advise for the normal Enterprise ? I'm trying to understand where it makes prudent sense to enable encryption and where it's redundant. I'm trying to counter this statement: that encryption of the media stream should be encouraged. Although the MPLS network is private, it is easy to setup a traffic sniffer on computers and to tap and record calls. This is unlike the ISDN world where telecoms equipment is usually locked up and inaccessible to most employees. Companies do accept encryption as normal overhead" What I've been told that most enterprise networks are switched, so the connection from the desk goes to a switch and then right to the VoIP system, so it's basically non-trivial to tap a phone line that way. VoWiFi is different, but there are more issues than security with that. Legacy environment equivalent for wired VoIP. Also that Encryption will increase delay, reduce quality, and increase BW consumption. I don't see a lot of need for encryption except across a peering point for example. Thanks, -guy

3 2

ACME Contact Header rewrite
by lriemer＠bestline.net Oct. 7, 2009

Oct. 7, 2009

Anyone know how to disable the Contact rewrite? I'm trying to build a PBX in a Metaswitch and the configured SIP binding has an ACME as it's proxy. I have outbound working fine, but it breaks on inbound as the MS is looking for the PBX IP in the Contact header, not the ACME's. I understand the point is for the signaling to come back to the ACME, but the proxy setting in the SIP binding takes care of that. Lee

3 4

acme nat traversal clue
by mewash＠gmail.com Oct. 7, 2009

Oct. 7, 2009

hi guys, need a bit of help... have never touched an acme before so i'm not sure what to tell the people i am dealing with, and they seem incapable of resolving the problem themselves. trying to explain the difference between layer 3 and layer 7 is not working. setup: i have an ip pbx with a single interface at 10.0.1.80, and a netscreen 50 with a static routable ip natted to the pbx at 1.1.1.1 (sip alg is off). my itsp has an acme at 2.2.2.2. this is what an inbound call looks like right now: 2.2.2.2 -> 1.1.1.1 invite sip:xxxxxx at 1.1.1.1 <sip%3Axxxxxx at 1.1.1.1> 10.0.1.80 -> 2.2.2.2 100 trying 10.0.1.80 -> 2.2.2.2 200 ok (contact: sip:xxxxxx at 10.0.1.80<sip%3Axxxxxx at 10.0.1.80> ) 2.2.2.2 -> 10.0.1.80 ack sip:xxxxxx at 10.0.1.80 <sip%3Axxxxxx at 10.0.1.80> so obviously it breaks at this point. according to them, they are unable to configure the acme to respond to the originating routable ip instead of the nonroutable ip in the sip contact. this is what someone at acme told them: It?s not a configuration issue, the endpoint at 1.1.1.1 has set it?s contact header address to 10.0.1.80 in it?s 200 OK response back to 2.2.2.2 (SBC). The SD will look at the Contact header in order to determine where to send future in-dialog requests such as ACK, BYE, Re-INVITEs etc (according to RFC3261). Please can you check why 1.1.1.1 would be doing so? this sounds irrelevant to me, since any sip endpoint will set its contact header address to its own ip. sounds like this guy is saying "well it's natted so that won't work, tell them to fix it." i certainly can't configure my pbx to respond with a modified contact header. can anyone provide some guidance here? or maybe i am just wrong and it is impossible to make this work. but it looks like a basic hnt situation to me. thanks, milosz

8 10

Default credentials for CUE?
by Rod.Dossouvi.CTR＠dot.gov Oct. 6, 2009

Oct. 6, 2009

What's the default credentials for CUE? Rod Dossouvi Sr Network Engineer INDUS Corporation FHWA - USDOT Direct 202-366-9028

1 0

Advantages to running Broadsoft on RHEL 5 vs RHEL 4
by Michael.Lively＠cox.com Oct. 4, 2009

Oct. 4, 2009

Hello all, Does anyone have any information on advantages to running RHEL 5 for Broadsoft Application servers over RHEL 4? Specifically, are there any performance / scalability enhancements anyone has seen? Michael Lively Design Engineer Cox Communications michael.lively at cox.com 404-269-3415

3 3

Switching dial out using "8" instead of "9"
by Rod.Dossouvi.CTR＠dot.gov Oct. 2, 2009

Oct. 2, 2009

Hi, What needs to take place in order to change dial out from "9" to "8"? Thanks. Rod Dossouvi Sr Network Engineer INDUS Corporation FHWA, USDOT 1200 New Jersey Avenue South East Washington, DC 20590 Direct 202-366-9028 Mobile 240-422-4588

8 19

IP routing to 208.71.177.15 or 208.71.179.10?
by hiersd＠gmail.com Oct. 2, 2009

Oct. 2, 2009

Is anyone having trouble routing to 208.71.177.15 or 208.71.179.10? Can't get there from 65.59.112.0/24 in Chicago. David

1 0

[CCNA Voice Study Group] New message: "Re: CCNA Voice Crossroad"
by Rod.Dossouvi.CTR＠dot.gov Oct. 2, 2009

Oct. 2, 2009

Will the enterprise option give you a good understanding of Cisco Unified Communications Manager Express 4.1 (Cisco UME) and Cisco Unity Express (CUE) as well? -----Original Message----- From: Chad [mailto:cln at cln.cisco.com] Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 1:27 PM To: Dossouvi, Rod CTR (FHWA) Subject: [CCNA Voice Study Group] New message: "Re: CCNA Voice Crossroad" Rod, A new message was posted in the thread "CCNA Voice Crossroad": https://cisco.hosted.jivesoftware.com/message/35454#35454 Author : Chad Profile : https://cisco.hosted.jivesoftware.com/people/cfogg at e-rewards.com Message: -------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Francisco, ? ? The new CCNA Voice Certification enterprise option assesses skills/knowledge related to the Cisco Unified Communications Manager 6.0 (CUCM 6.0). It is typically employed by large organizations such as governments, large companies, and colleges. ? The CCNA Voice Certification commercial option continues to use the IIUC #640-460 exam and assesses skills and knowledge related to the Cisco Unified Communications Manager Express 4.1 (Cisco UME) and Cisco Unity Express (CUE), solutions typically used by medium & small organizations such as companies with less than 2,000 employees, retail businesses, and small school districts. ? ? My thought is to go through the Enterprise Option because the will open up bigger opportunites for you, but is more widely used that the commercial option. Unless, you are just getting the cert. to put behind your name. If you are passionate about getting your CCVP and want to extend your career more in that field, then doing the Enterprise option is the way to go. -------------------------------------------------------------- To reply to this message visit the message page: https://cisco.hosted.jivesoftware.com/message/35454#35454

1 0