So I installed a new ERL, assigned it a public static IP & Gateway and the internet is working. However, I am still having the same issue with only about 3 of the 6 devices. (where they keep being marked as unreachable.)

The Comcast "Gateway" has an option to go into Bridged Mode. This is what I was planning on doing, in an attempt to completely bypass the comcast box, and eliminate any chances of double NATing, or some other issue messing with SIP. I called Comcast and they tell me that enabling Bridged Mode will not work with a static IP address. So I tried switching to bridged mode anyway, and sure enough, it didn't work. No internet access was possible. Switching back to "normal" mode solves the internet issue, but I still have have the issues with the phones being marked as unreachable.

This really feels like some sort of double NAT issue, or something else on the Comcast gateway causing the NAT holes to close. It's almost like it cannot handle more than 3 simultaneous SIP connections. The problems are not with the phones, as I've tested them at other locations outside of this location and they have no issues whatsoever. The problems are not specific to specific phones either. There are always problems with 3 of the 6 devices.

@travisdh1 said in SIP registrations failing for 2 phones:

@fuznutz04 said in SIP registrations failing for 2 phones:

@JaredBusch The moral of this story is that Comcast "business " all in one modems/firewalls suck. Specifically, they are not capable of handling more than about 2 current SIP registrations at once. Which is stupid, because my old WRT54G handled more than that when I needed to use it in a pinch.

I've never trusted anything from an ISP. Take the cheapest cheapskate you ever knew, and that person buys better equipment than most ISP provided on-premise anything.

True story.

That was my professional answer of course. "The router sucks" and "This is just stupid" are technical terms of course.

@JaredBusch The moral of this story is that Comcast "business " all in one modems/firewalls suck. Specifically, they are not capable of handling more than about 2 current SIP registrations at once. Which is stupid, because my old WRT54G handled more than that when I needed to use it in a pinch.

@JaredBusch said in SIP registrations failing for 2 phones:

outers have problems with multiple devices and NAT on the same port.
In the Yealink phones, they specifically a

I have a router coming tomorrow, so I'm pretty confident that will fix these issues. However, that's good to know, and I haven't run into this specific problem before. Good to know that changing the port to a lower one might fix the issue. @hubtechagain seems pretty confident that it will for sure fix it. I'll give it a shot, nothing to lose at this point.

@hubtechagain You mean manually specify in both the phone as well as the extension settings for these particular extensions?

@hubtechagain said in SIP registrations failing for 2 phones:

Put the phones back on network. And under the reporting tab in Fpbx check your devices. See if the two devices that are not working are getting super high ports. If so you can manually assign a sip port within range and they will work. Sorry typing from my phone at a client so I don't have my specific notes or anything. @JaredBusch helped me with this problem in the past.

There is one phone there right now that is now doing the same thing (this is the 3rd phone now) It currently is using port 42808

@JaredBusch said in SIP registrations failing for 2 phones:

@fuznutz04 said in SIP registrations failing for 2 phones:

@dafyre Not sure where you are located, but in the US, you can buy direct from the manufacturer.

But amazon prime makes it cheaper since no shipping usually.

True. Amazon prime is the best. Their video selection is lacking for me, but their prime music works great for me. That, along with free shipping, you really cant beat it. Also, they have the ERL for 88 bucks right now.

Great timing. I was just about to post something similar. Very annoying errors though.

@dafyre Not sure where you are located, but in the US, you can buy direct from the manufacturer.

Network portion on the wall has been setup for a while now, but just installed the electric and ran a wire for the rack piece this weekend.

My rack is a full size rack, cut in half and welded back together with the help of a grinder, a welder, and a few drinks.

@dafyre What Scott said... ERX at home, and ERL or greater in business. My main reason for this is the Console port access. I ran into a situation where my config was borked, and after a simple restart, my ERX didn't come back online. I had no idea where it was failing so I had to break out the paper clip and start over. If I would have used the ER Lite, I could have connected via console port and checked out what was going on.

@StrongBad Yep, I've put those in at numerous businesses, and they work great with remote PBXs. Actually, I haven't found anything that they are NOT good at yet for SMBs.

Brought back the 2 non-working phones to my office, plugged them in, watched the Asterisk console, and haven't had a single "unregister" in an hour. Looks like that Comcast modem/router just sucks. Time for an ERL.

I didn't install the network, just setting up some new phones. But the more I poke around, the more I am starting to believe that putting the comcast modem in "bridge mode" and getting a new router/firewall in here might solve the problem.

There is no separate firewall/router. It's all built into the Comcast modem. Going through every setting on the modem, there is no SIP alg, UDP throttling etc. And it's only happening on 2 of the phones.

I've never had to setup STUN at all for remote connections. (Grandstream GXP2170s) What would you suggest?

I have a client who has a comcast business connection (cable 50/20), with Comcast's cable modem acting as the firewall/router for the internal network (7 people). Their PBX is FreePBX, hosted offsite as a VPS. All of their phones are able to make outbound calls. 2 of their phones, keep losing registration with the server, so when calls come in to the incoming queue/ring group, those 2 phones do not ring, because FreePBX has marked them as unreachable. Has anyone had any issues similar to this? I've already factory reset the phones, and removed and re-added the problem extensions to rule out a misconfiguration. Still experiencing the same issues where the phones register, then unregister.

@scottalanmiller said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@fuznutz04 said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@scottalanmiller said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@fuznutz04 said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@scottalanmiller said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@fuznutz04 said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@scottalanmiller said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

Good reading, as well: http://www.smbitjournal.com/2011/02/why-we-reboot-servers/

A little modern design can get that to zero downtime no problem.

Sure thing, but that would have been a huge undertaking in regards to how applications were written/designed. Starting fresh, no question.

Would it? What are you running that wouldn't do that today? Wordpress will sure do that.

Well, my comment was based on what the developers were telling me back then. Specifically, the way the websites (IIS & .NET) and databases (MS SQL) handle individual user "sessions". I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but it was more effort and development time than what the company was willing to invest in at that point in time.

Oh, the developers screwed up and made a bad application that can't scare properly and then got stuck because scaling and transparent updates are done in the same way. Got it.

But for WordPress, it "just works."

More like, it was an older product that was built up over many, many years, and the products were being phased out anyway, and being replaced by a newer product that would scale properly. I left before said product came to market though.

I have no complaints about Wordpress nowadays. Very simple to setup and use. Really a great tool for all user levels.

@scottalanmiller said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@fuznutz04 said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@scottalanmiller said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@fuznutz04 said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

@scottalanmiller said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

Good reading, as well: http://www.smbitjournal.com/2011/02/why-we-reboot-servers/

A little modern design can get that to zero downtime no problem.

Sure thing, but that would have been a huge undertaking in regards to how applications were written/designed. Starting fresh, no question.

Would it? What are you running that wouldn't do that today? Wordpress will sure do that.

Well, my comment was based on what the developers were telling me back then. Specifically, the way the websites (IIS & .NET) and databases (MS SQL) handle individual user "sessions". I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but it was more effort and development time than what the company was willing to invest in at that point in time.

@stacksofplates said in Wordpress on Vultr 768:

Just as a note, I've run a Drupal site on the minimal Vultr instance and it was fine. However it was LEMP (NGINX not Apache). Def wasn't super busy but it did fine.

Good to know. So far, performance is much better since re-install. And memory usage is far better.