Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Mike Lewis on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
IP Trunking
- Thread starter chris2705
- Start date
Had to read this several times and I'm still not sure I understand your question.
Here is what I think you meant.
Currently have 2 sites, each with a separate controller.
Proposed to have 1 site, still keep controllers separate and linked via IP.
If above is correct, no problem. The controllers don't care where they a physically located.
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
Here is what I think you meant.
Currently have 2 sites, each with a separate controller.
Proposed to have 1 site, still keep controllers separate and linked via IP.
If above is correct, no problem. The controllers don't care where they a physically located.
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
I am confused as well. If the sites are linked by IP trunks already not sure what you are asking. Do you want all users on one controller but have them fail over to the other in event of a problem? If that is what you want then as long as you have a network where the phones can see both 33000's just move the users all on to the one controller and if licensing permits make them resilient. Hopefully you have the necessary QoS and routing in place to support this. You may have to expand your ARS programming so that trunk calls go out the appropriate 3300 acting as a gateway.
The single biggest problem with communications is the illusion that it has taken place.
The single biggest problem with communications is the illusion that it has taken place.
Yeah Loopylou, I saw that possibility as well but I'm betting on both controllers AND users on a single site but continuing to be run separately as they do today.
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
- Thread starter
- #5
Supernova99
Technical User
Yes that is entirely possible.
I presume you would like to have 1 controller as the primary and the other as a resilient 'backup' controller.
If so then just move all the users to one box and make them resilient on the other.
You might run into licencing issues if so you will just need to make sure you licence online and get your VAR to move the licences to the primary.
Share what you know - Learn what you don't
I presume you would like to have 1 controller as the primary and the other as a resilient 'backup' controller.
If so then just move all the users to one box and make them resilient on the other.
You might run into licencing issues if so you will just need to make sure you licence online and get your VAR to move the licences to the primary.
Share what you know - Learn what you don't
There are lots of ways to optimise the systems once they are co-resident but none are required. As I said before, the controllers do not care where they are physically located. If you still want everything separate just design your network accordingly. If you want to optimise, just ask, I'm sure we have lots of suggestions.
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
**********************************************
What's most important is that you realise ... There is no spoon.
As long as the controllers can "see" each other the IP trunks will still work. Even if you were to plug them into the same layer 2 switch they would still use IP trunks to link. Once you have the 3300's in one building you can move the users to one controller if you wish and make them resilient to the second ( licenses permitting of course ). I would setup one 3300 as the DHCP source rather then having the two you most likely have with systems in differnt buildings. The phones can then be anywhere that your network reaches. Remember 911 issue in that if users in are in the second building and they dial 911 it goes out the trunks in the first building.
The single biggest problem with communications is the illusion that it has taken place.
The single biggest problem with communications is the illusion that it has taken place.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question