VoIP One-way Audio and Voice drops
-
@JaredBusch said:
For @Bundy I use a public STUN server simply because there are only 2-3 extensions that are not inside an OpenVPN tunnel in the first place.
Public STUN server? can you give more details?
-
-
I setup a secondary trunk via Vitelity, attached it to the PBX and called in and out. This caused the same issues we were seeing previously. I then attached that trunk to my handset locally, bypassing the PBX, this also caused the same issue we have been seeing.
I've ruled out the PBX and SIP Trunk... all that remains is our firewall/router and our internet connection.
-
Realistically, the Internet connection cannot do this. That means it is the router. Which we pretty much knew all along as this is the exact behaviour of a router having issues.
-
So now is the question. Do I fight with Meraki support (which has been fairly good in the past) or do I just replace the hardware and get something overnight-ed.
-
Replacing the Meraki is a pretty big win even if that proved not to be the issue, somehow. Those things are the most costly devices ever and really don't provide any special value for that price that I've seen. They were going strong for a bit but really tanked and THEN Cisco stepped in and added the Cisco mess to the situation.
You could throw anything, more or less, in for a quick test to know if it is the Meraki or not.
-
I have an older Sonicwall device sitting on the shelf... but I replaced it for a reason, basic garbage to begin with.
-
@coliver said:
I have an older Sonicwall device sitting on the shelf... but I replaced it for a reason, basic garbage to begin with.
Yeah, and SonicWall is famous for not working with VoIP.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
You could throw anything, more or less, in for a quick test to know if it is the Meraki or not.
@coliver said:
I have an older Sonicwall device sitting on the shelf... but I replaced it for a reason, basic garbage to begin with.
This falls under the less part of more or less..
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
You could throw anything, more or less, in for a quick test to know if it is the Meraki or not.
@coliver said:
I have an older Sonicwall device sitting on the shelf... but I replaced it for a reason, basic garbage to begin with.
This falls under the less part of more or less..
Haha, I see what you're saying.
-
Does anyone have experience with the ERPro-8 or any of the EdgeRouter line? I realize it doesn't have the security filtering or web filtering that the Meraki has, but it may be worth it to set that up separately.
-
I have not used any of the Pro line, but it is all the same OS as the Lite and PoE models.
Why are you looking at the Pro? Do you need the ports?
-
@JaredBusch said:
I have not used any of the Pro line, but it is all the same OS as the Lite and PoE models.
Why are you looking at the Pro? Do you need the ports?
No, I am looking at it just as a for instance. Have you worked with the ERPoE one? or the Lite one, they look like they have the same hardware minus the additional PoE ports.
-
@coliver said:
Does anyone have experience with the ERPro-8 or any of the EdgeRouter line? I realize it doesn't have the security filtering or web filtering that the Meraki has, but it may be worth it to set that up separately.
We use the ERL.
-
@coliver said:
No, I am looking at it just as a for instance. Have you worked with the ERPoE one?
They do not have all the same hardware. The additional thing on the PoE is that eth2-4 also have a switch chip. The ERL has no switching chip so if you want two interfaces on the same network for that model, you have to bridge them which in turn reduces max throughput (wakes you down to 300-400 mbps max).
With the PoE you can setup those ports on the switch chip and use them like any other switch. This is how I use it. I have one site with 2 UAP. I have it powering the UAP on the switch ports. eth0 is WAN and eth1 is LAN. sw0 is the WiFi with the eth3 and eth4 being on the switch. eth2 is unused at the moment.
-
@coliver said:
No, I am looking at it just as a for instance. Have you worked with the ERPoE one? or the Lite one, they look like they have the same hardware minus the additional PoE ports.
Specifically, i have both the ERL and the ERPoE in production.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@coliver said:
No, I am looking at it just as a for instance. Have you worked with the ERPoE one?
They do not have all the same hardware. The additional thing on the PoE is that eth2-4 also have a switch chip. The ERL has no switching chip so if you want two interfaces on the same network for that model, you have to bridge them which in turn reduces max throughput (wakes you down to 300-400 mbps max).
With the PoE you can setup those ports on the switch chip and use them like any other switch. This is how I use it. I have one site with 2 UAP. I have it powering the UAP on the switch ports. eth0 is WAN and eth1 is LAN. sw0 is the WiFi with the eth3 and eth4 being on the switch. eth2 is unused at the moment.
Oh, that is some really good information. I was looking to use it specifically in the fashion you describe and make it my "level 3" switch in addition to the router. Which is how I currently use the Meraki.
-
@coliver said:
Oh, that is some really good information. I was looking to use it specifically in the fashion you describe and make it my "level 3" switch in addition to the router. Which is how I currently use the Meraki.
The ER-Pro does NOT have a switch chip. All ports are routed. It is not designed to act as a switch. Those devices were designed for WISPs in general, though of course anyone can use them.
I have no idea what max throughput would be on a set of bridged interfaces on an ER-Pro 8. It would be higher than an ERL because there is much better processor in it.
-
@coliver said:
@JaredBusch said:
@coliver said:
No, I am looking at it just as a for instance. Have you worked with the ERPoE one?
They do not have all the same hardware. The additional thing on the PoE is that eth2-4 also have a switch chip. The ERL has no switching chip so if you want two interfaces on the same network for that model, you have to bridge them which in turn reduces max throughput (wakes you down to 300-400 mbps max).
With the PoE you can setup those ports on the switch chip and use them like any other switch. This is how I use it. I have one site with 2 UAP. I have it powering the UAP on the switch ports. eth0 is WAN and eth1 is LAN. sw0 is the WiFi with the eth3 and eth4 being on the switch. eth2 is unused at the moment.
Oh, that is some really good information. I was looking to use it specifically in the fashion you describe and make it my "level 3" switch in addition to the router. Which is how I currently use the Meraki.
Best to get a small L3 switch, if that is what you need. Why do you need an L3 switch?
-
@JaredBusch said:
@coliver said:
Oh, that is some really good information. I was looking to use it specifically in the fashion you describe and make it my "level 3" switch in addition to the router. Which is how I currently use the Meraki.
The ER-Pro does NOT have a switch chip. All ports are routed. It is not designed to act as a switch. Those devices were designed for WISPs in general, though of course anyone can use them.
I have no idea what max throughput would be on a set of bridged interfaces on an ER-Pro 8. It would be higher than an ERL because there is much better processor in it.
I'm looking at the datasheets. That info must be buried somewhere else. Thanks for that info I will have to look at the ERPoE then.
