Noah, Thanks for your input on this. I am not sure if it handles incomng connections or not - will have to check. I don't think it will work either - worth a shot to ask though.
Thanks! - Pedro On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:26:48 -0500, Noah Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We have a client that wants to bond 2 DSL circuits instead of getting > > a T-1 (or similar) at their office to run their VoIP traffic on. We > > came across this Multihomed Gateway (MH200): > > > > http://www.cyberpathinc.com/mh200/details.htm > > > > Does anybody think this would work if installed at the client location > > handling NAT for 10 Cisco 7960's and connecting to our public asterisk > > server? > > > > My concern (as is others on this list in regards to load balancing) is > > what would happen if a call had to be directed out the other WAN port > > of the MH200 or if a call were to come in on 1 circuit and it runs out > > of bandwidth - how would the call be delivered to the second circuit. > > Or even if during a call, the inbound audio is fine (since DSL usually > > has more bandwidth on the download), but the outbound audio stream had > > to be pushed out the other WAN port. > > > > Hope that all makes sense (I almost confused myself! LOL) > > > > I am not holding my breath that this is a viable solution, but was > > just wondering your thoughts. > > I had the displeasure of working with the now defunct iSurfJanus from > Amplify Networks which is similar to the MH200. I'm not sure the MH200 > is capable of doing what you want it to do. I don't think it does > "incoming load balancing". The only ways I know of to host a machine > behind two or more connections, "incoming load balancing", are 1) > BGP, 2) Cisco HSRP, or with 3) DNS and extremely short TTL values. > There may be some other ways, but these are the popular ones. The > multiple WAN devices capable of incoming load balancing like the F5 > BigIP, Fatpipe Products, Radware Linkproof, etc. all use special DNS > entries to spread the incoming connections between WAN connections. > > When I looked at the product specs of the MH200 it makes no mention of > BGP, DNS, or anything else that might handle incoming connections. In > fact, it doesn't say anything about incoming connections at all. > > To answer your question directly, I don't know how the other products > work, but I could configure the iSurfJanus to respond to requests only > on the same connection they came in on. If the MH200 does handle > incoming connections, you will probably need to ask the folks that make > it if you can explicitly specify to respond to incoming request on the > same WAN connection they came in on. > > _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
