[cisco-voip] Sip design question

[Ryan Huff]

CUBE-HA on a 4k doesn't seem very battle tested yet. Clearly it shouldn't go the way of CUBE-SP on an ASR1k which got dumped.

Some of those are significant caveats though (SDP passthru being a possible deal killer for me); almost makes just doing plain old HSRP and setting the client expectation for failover seem just as reasonable.

Thanks,

Ryan


> From: wokka at justfamily.org
> Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 08:17:45 -0600
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Sip design question
> To: ryanhuff at outlook.com
> CC: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> 
> Per this: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/cube_mgmt/configuration/xe-3s/cube-mgmt-xe-3s-book/voi-stateful-switchover.html
> it says it is on 3.2 or later, but it does have a list of caveats,
> perhaps that is what I was thinking about.
> 
> Sorry for the false alarm.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 5:33 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com> wrote:
> > Charles,
> >
> > I guess that is a better place to start; I may be going down this road in a
> > near future. I have been reading
> > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/cube/configuration/cube-book/voi-cube-high-availability.html#concept_5013D60352C446769D62736C8CDE87E8
> > which seems to suggest that L2 box to box is possible on the 4451.
> >
> > Are you saying it is not?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> >> From: wokka at justfamily.org
> >> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 23:59:34 -0600
> >> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Sip design question
> >> To: ryanhuff at outlook.com
> >> CC: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> >
> >>
> >> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought cube-ha was missing from
> >> the code on these? same as the ASR's since they are all running
> >> ios-xe.
> >>
> >> I have not tested it myself, just doing a lot of reading in
> >> preparation of deploying these.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com> wrote:
> >> > I have a pair of cubes on 4000 series ISRs. I want to do cube-ha on the
> >> > ccm
> >> > facing side and the itsp facing side.
> >> >
> >> > 1.) Am I better off just doing HSRP on both sides (which is 70% of
> >> > cube-ha
> >> > anyway) or is it practical to do the connected call failover portion?
> >> >
> >> > 2.) If I include the connected call failover, which side would I do that
> >> > one, 1 or both (ccm facing side or itsp facing side)?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> >
> >> > Ryan
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > cisco-voip mailing list
> >> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> >> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >> >
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20150401/470b5a85/attachment.html>