Re: atm/voip (continued)

From: Barry J. Bocaner (barry@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Jan 28 2001 - 20:03:54 GMT-3


   
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001, Brian Hescock wrote:
> Ok, one possibility is to put voice and data on different pvc's is to use
> subinterfaces with a different pvc on each then policy route it based upon
> ip precedence. But that's ugly (it will increase cpu utilization in the
> real world), there's got to be a better way. Any ideas?

Sure. The obvious would be to use VoATM rather than VoIP over ATM.

But beyond that, you could set up a second set of loopback interfaces for
your voice traffic and use distribute lists to make sure those addresses
are only advertised over your voice PVCs and not your data ones -- and
that your data routes are not advertised over your voice PVCs.

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
     Barry J. Bocaner
   Sr. Network Engineer Sonic Telecom
 <barry@sonictelecom.net> 703-573-9884 x 103
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:46 GMT-3