[cisco-voip] Nortel LAN switches and Cisco IP Phones

[Simon, Bill]

We're using non-Cisco LAN equipment.  We do not use VLANs; the voice 
network is segregated and there is no data traffic permitted 
(subnetting/ACLs).

The only way to do the "Cisco way" is to use Cisco gear.  CDP is a big 
deal.  We are kind of sore that we don't have some of the additional 
functionality that CDP provides.

Voll, Scott wrote:
> I assume that saving money on IP Phones should have been switches.
> 
>  
> 
> If you want to encourage cisco switches tell them they need twice as 
> many ports so you can run the phone on one Vlan and data on the other.
> 
>  
> 
> Really, if bandwidth is not an issue across the LAN then running on the 
> same VLAN shouldn’t be an issue.  I just wouldn’t what to support it, or 
> the security.  And TAC will say go talk to Nortel with any voice issues.
> 
>  
> 
> Just my 2 cents
> 
>  
> 
> Scott
> 
>  
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net 
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Tim Medley
> *Sent:* Friday, January 19, 2007 9:21 AM
> *To:* cisco-voip at puck-nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Nortel LAN switches and Cisco IP Phones
> 
>  
> 
> A customer just posed a question to me and I couldn't find anything on 
> google.
> 
>  
> 
> Are there any interoperability issue with using Nortel LAN switches with 
> Cisco IP Phones. The CIO for this customer is looking to save some $ by 
> using non-cisco ip phones. 
> 
>  
> 
> My first thoughts were that the Cisco switch provides two things, power 
> and voice vlan support. The nortel switches do support 802.3af so power 
> should not be an issue. But since CDP is a cisco proprietary protocol, 
> the nortel switches won't support CDP which means that the phones will 
> not automatically use the voice vlan for voice traffic. This just means 
> that the customer would have to do something else to segregate and QoS 
> the voice traffic such as an acl.
> 
>  
> 
> Are there any other considerations?