Options
local RGs in a centralised topology
wintermute000
Banned Posts: 172
Never used local RGs in prod, and in my current environment, we migrated to a centralised SIP topology (got rid of all TDMs and MGCP gateways... hooray for the future LOL). So no point anymore (since everyone's RPs uses the same SIP RL/RGs, we can't actually use AAR since there's no PSTN to AAR fallback to, we're one country so no E164 global normalization requirements + I don't want to have to explain this to everyone else LOL).
Just curious: if you wanted to use local RGs anyway (say you had a mix of central SIP and local PSTN), would it break anything if you specified the central SIP RG for most device pools, but left the local PSTN sites using their local PSTN RGs? I can't see how it would NOT work but curious if anyone has this running in prod.
Cheers
Just curious: if you wanted to use local RGs anyway (say you had a mix of central SIP and local PSTN), would it break anything if you specified the central SIP RG for most device pools, but left the local PSTN sites using their local PSTN RGs? I can't see how it would NOT work but curious if anyone has this running in prod.
Cheers
Comments
-
Options
shodown
Member Posts: 2,271
I do quite a few of these. Usually if SIP is centralized we use the SLG so that they all use the MAIN SIP gateways(usually the HQ and DR site), but then in case of WAN failure large medium sized campuses will keep a PRI and large campuses will have multiple PRI's or large SIP trunks coming in for failure. They will just be specified in the route list or route group.Currently Reading
CUCM SRND 9x/10, UCCX SRND 10x, QOS SRND, SIP Trunking Guide, anything contact center related -
Optionswintermute000
Banned Posts: 172
Thanks for confirming.
For your particular scenario, Just to clarify, do you mean that for the PRI backup sites their RPs go to RLs with the Sip RG first then the local RG second?
Doesn't that kind of eliminate the main benefit of local RG since now you are back to configuring individual RPs and RLs per site. Or am I mis-understanding you.
On a side note we've always gone dual WAN (diverse carrier) for redundancy. If we're going to pay for an extra circuit might as well pay a bit more and get data backup as well. We've never had a scenario where the marginal gain of having a third PSTN fallback outweighs the extra cost (since losing both WANs at the same time usually means either power or someone's cut the lead-in, which basically means your PSTN is down as well anyway).