FreePBX Server and SIP Phone IP Configuration

Hi everyone,

I’ve recently set up a new FreePBX server with the IP address 10.100.11.18, replacing our old Elastix system. While all SIP phones that were previously using IPs in the 10.100.11.xxx range are working fine.

The problem is that certain SIP phones only work if I change their IP addresses to the 10.100.10.xxx range. I’ve ensured that the local network settings in both SIP settings and Chan_pjsip are configured as 10.100.10.0/23.

Has anyone faced a similar issue, or does anyone have suggestions on how to resolve this? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance for your assistance!

Do you need a /23 subnet? if so how is the interface fully defined in the OS?

Hi dicko,

Yes I need it.

Network interface: eth0, Static IP: 10.100.11.18, Netmask: 23, gateway: 10.100.10.3

Does that agree with how eth0 is defined in the underlying OS?

Somewhere, you have a DHCP server or a router or something that is NOT using 255.255.254.0 as a subnet mask.

Or you have a Cisco router that lacks an “ip classless” statement

Or you have a router from some other vendor that is using classful addressing

all SIP phones are using static IP.
but I will verify the settings,
thank you.

Yes it does.

As some would say “trust but verify” , please post the issue of

ip add show dev eth0
ip route

Are all SIP phones running the same firmware version? Are they all the same model? Are they configed from a webserver on the phone or from config files from a tftp server? Is there any commonality in the models that only work from the 10.100.10.x IP addressing?

One thing I have run into when changing subnet masks on an established network (going from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.254.0 for example) is invariably you forget to change a subnet mask somewhere. Another problem is that not all software developers who write firmware completely understand the idea behind subnetting. I’ve run into firmware that only works properly if you use 255.0.0.0 or 255.255.0.0 or 255.255.255.0 as a subnet mask. That’s why I reserve the subnet games of slicing and dicing IPv4 subnets for actual public numbers on the real Internet when working with the real Internet (I was a system admin of an ISP for 10 years a decade ago) and I avoid classless masks with private IP addressing.

The entire point of private IP addressing is to give you unlimited numbers to use in your organization so if you are too big to fit in a Class C then use a Class B subnet and quit being fancy. We know you are smart enough to understand subnetting since you understand what CIDR is you don’t need to prove it to the devices which don’t give a rip if they are on 172.16.x or 10.x.x.x or 192.168.x. The problem is the gear you are working with may have been built by people not as smart as you and their ignorance of what an IPv4 subnet is will gun you.

2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP group default qlen 1000
link/ether a4:ba:…
inet 10.100.11.18/23 brd 10.100.11.255 scope global eth0
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
inet6 fe80::a6ba:… scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

default via 10.100.10.3 dev eth0
10.100.10.0/23 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.100.11.18
169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0 scope link metric 1002

verified :slight_smile:

now maybe watch sngrep as phones try to REGISTER (or INVITE)

This topic was automatically closed 31 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.