[cisco-voip] SIP Binding: Different Binds for Carrier vs Internal

[Anthony Holloway]

First up, you don't need to bind your interfaces.  You should bind your
interfaces in two scenarios though:

1. You're trying to source your IP from a loopback address
2. You only have one interface

Otherwise, let the router do it's routing and it will pick the correct
interface to "bind" SIP too, by the nature of which interface the packet
leaves the router from.

Now, you can bind, if you want to, but it doesn't do anything extra, to the
best of my knowledge.

When you say, "[n]ever see the other’s IP," you should know that this
happens by default.  That's what a B2BUA does.  It terminates a dialog with
one peer, and then turns around and originates a new dialog with a
different peer.

And yes, flow through is default, but that does not affect signaling, which
it kind of sounds like is the topic at hand.  Otherwise, flow around means
your carrier knows how to hit your inside IP Phone addresses directly, and
that's not likely the case.

So literally, you do not have to do anything extra or special to get what
you want.  You simply configure the router as a device with two interfaces
on two different networks, and teach it how to route (e.g., static routing
or something, I don't know I'm not a CCIE Routing and Switching).

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 2:25 PM Matthew Loraditch <
MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> I need to bind call legs to my carrier to one IP and all legs to CUCM on
> another IP on the same router and neither side ever see the other’s IP nor
> need to route to it
>
>
>
> I’ve done something, at least similar, many years in the past but no
> longer have access to the environment to verify the behavior and am trying
> to refresh myself on the setting.
>
>
>
> In that setup we bound the dial peers to the relevant interfaces and
> enabled allow-connections sip to sip and address-hiding in my voice service
> voip config.
>
>
>
> From what I further understand media flow-through is the default behavior
> so as long as I do the binding, I will get what I want to happen happening.
>
>
>
> Am I generally correct in all of my current thoughts? Anything I’m not
> thinking of?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch​
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com* <http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>  |
> e: *MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com* <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>
> [image: Helion Technologies] <http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>
> [image: Facebook] <https://facebook.com/heliontech>
> [image: Twitter] <https://twitter.com/heliontech>
> [image: LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200911/d791e35a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image102391.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9409 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20200911/d791e35a/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image623571.png
Type: image/png
Size: 431 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20200911/d791e35a/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image194924.png
Type: image/png
Size: 561 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20200911/d791e35a/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image498113.png
Type: image/png
Size: 444 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20200911/d791e35a/attachment-0003.png>