Hi guys,
In my area, VoIP providers set up their equipment such that their device replaces the existing router and takes up its role in doing NAT and DHCP. The existing router continues to serve as a switch and wireless AP. The reason they do that is to reserve bandwidth for phone calls.
I bet most people do not notice a difference, but in effect network performance suffers from the device's weak routing abilities. Indeed, the provider says you can't have more than 6 devices on your network.
Six devices is still more than we have at a typical home here, but I've recently ran into that limitation in a small school, where we ordered a VoIP line only to find out that after the installation, part of the building could not use the internet any more, because we have 20 computers.
I came up with a solution as follows: we now have two chained subnets, one between the VoIP device and our existing router; and one between our existing router and the rest of the computers. The WAN port of the router, previously configured for PPPoE dialing, is now configured for DHCP and obtains IP from the VoIP device. The VoIP device sees only the WAN side of the router, and all traffic appears to originate from one client. This configuration works around the 6-device limitation, and since the router continues to do NAT for the building, network speed does not suffer too much from the presence of the VoIP device, at least not in our context.
Any idea if this configuration should prove viable in the long run?
A couple of notes:
* The VoIP device I'm talking about is this: http://www.audiocodes.com/products/mediapack-20x (exact variant MP-202B/2FXS/SIP, see "Spec" page).
* The router is a DIR-655.
* The reason we don't get a separate internet connection for the VoIP line is to save on costs.
________
Medical marijuana despinsary
In my area, VoIP providers set up their equipment such that their device replaces the existing router and takes up its role in doing NAT and DHCP. The existing router continues to serve as a switch and wireless AP. The reason they do that is to reserve bandwidth for phone calls.
I bet most people do not notice a difference, but in effect network performance suffers from the device's weak routing abilities. Indeed, the provider says you can't have more than 6 devices on your network.
Six devices is still more than we have at a typical home here, but I've recently ran into that limitation in a small school, where we ordered a VoIP line only to find out that after the installation, part of the building could not use the internet any more, because we have 20 computers.
I came up with a solution as follows: we now have two chained subnets, one between the VoIP device and our existing router; and one between our existing router and the rest of the computers. The WAN port of the router, previously configured for PPPoE dialing, is now configured for DHCP and obtains IP from the VoIP device. The VoIP device sees only the WAN side of the router, and all traffic appears to originate from one client. This configuration works around the 6-device limitation, and since the router continues to do NAT for the building, network speed does not suffer too much from the presence of the VoIP device, at least not in our context.
Any idea if this configuration should prove viable in the long run?
A couple of notes:
* The VoIP device I'm talking about is this: http://www.audiocodes.com/products/mediapack-20x (exact variant MP-202B/2FXS/SIP, see "Spec" page).
* The router is a DIR-655.
* The reason we don't get a separate internet connection for the VoIP line is to save on costs.
________
Medical marijuana despinsary
Last edited:
