[cisco-voip] Gateways...

[Kevin Thorngren]

You should be able to get what you described below to work with H.323.  
I haven't tried this with MGCP (nor H.323) but I don't think it will 
work as you described.  The MGCP GW registers by using the hostname of 
the router so you won't be able to define two GWs for MGCP.

Maybe a better option for either H.323 or MGCP would be to use a 
loopback interface as the signaling and media interface for either 
H.323 or MGCP.  Then connect the GW to the two switches, each in a 
different subnet.  Inject the route to the loopback into your routing 
protocol (network statements under the routing process or static route, 
depending on your configuration).  This way you only need  to define 
one GW for either MGCP or H.323.  Since the loopback is a routable 
address, CCM will be able to reach it via either path.

Kevin
On Jul 5, 2006, at 7:04 PM, Jonathan Charles wrote:

> I am assessing the status of an existing implementation and I noticed
> that all of the voice gateways are connected to one of the 6509 core
> switches.
>
> I want to move two of the four to the other 6509, but then I realized
> that each of these gateways has two Fast Ethernets on them... Can I
> attach each gateway to both switches?
>
> We are currently running H.323, but I am trying to decide if we should
> go MGCP, will CCM be able the talk to the gateways on both IP
> addresses?
>
> I was thinking we could also enter the gateways twice (on each IP) and
> have the second IP be in a secondary route-group...
>
> What do all of you think?
>
>
>
>
> Jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>