Stun provisioning going away in v20

[mcsphones]

Hello. In general, we don't provision phones via Stun / Direct SIP, but there are a few stragglers where a user wants a desk phone at home; we're just talking about a literal handful out of 2000+ extensions - maybe 2-4 users. This feature works well and has been reliable for us. Can you elaborate on what the recommendation would be for similar functionality in v20? We've suggested a Yealink DECT headset connected to the PC and use the 3CX app, which may be a viable option, but I'd like to have plenty of information handy when we need to communicate the changes to customers. Thanks!

 

[SteveITS]

A router phone is essentially portable as it will connect through itself.

We have long used headsets ourselves, Sennheiser/EPOS when they were preferred, but one Yealink now. The Desktop App or web client works well in that scenario. Then the headset is essentially portable too.

 

[mcsphones]

Agreed; maybe a guide on the 3CX site could be published on how to configure a router phone to act as a "Stun / Direct SIP" phone, replacing that current functionality with the router features. Basically a guide for the one-off stragglers who want a desk phone at home.

 

[Alejandro_3CX]

Agreed; maybe a guide on the 3CX site could be published on how to configure a router phone to act as a "Stun / Direct SIP" phone, replacing that current functionality with the router features. Basically a guide for the one-off stragglers who want a desk phone at home.

using a router phone the user can have its own extension at home. There's no need for stun.

The router phone can be used with the user extension and will be connected via sbc...

Otherwise just use the 3CX Applications

 

[SteveITS]

It's not too bad, I've done it remotely once, on a Yealink. From memory:

• note the phone web GUI password in 3CX
• delete the phone from the extension
• factory reset the phone via its web GUI
• configure as router phone per the guide: https://www.3cx.com/sip-phones/yealink-t5-series/#h.l6t6r8q6ax3e
• reboot the phone via its web GUI to pick up the new settings
• change it and/or other phones to use the "new" SBC

 

[mcsphones]

Thanks to you both @SteveITS and @Alejandro_3CX!

Will existing, working & configured Stun extensions work after the v20 upgrade? That is, will v20 just block new Stun deployments, or will upgrading to v20 break existing Stun phones?

I'm also reminded of a business customer we have that purchased a few stores across the US (maybe 6-7 stores), each with 2 to 3 Stun-connected phones working at those locations. We can begin notifying them of the upcoming changes, but an example like this might be a cause for them not to upgrade to v20 immediately, unless existing Stun deployments will continue to work.

 

[SweetAction]

@Alejandro_3CX

Regarding STUN/Direct SIP.
Does this apply to on prem? Will all phones in network need to go through a SBC now? How about self host in Azure, etc? Is it a hard block (disabling Direct SIP registrations) or a "we don't show the option in the UI but you can still use it if you know what you're doing?" Can we get more information on this change?

 

[Alejandro_3CX]

Will existing, working & configured Stun extensions work after the v20 upgrade? That is, will v20 just block new Stun deployments, or will upgrading to v20 break existing Stun phones?

it is too early to know about, I'm afraid later there will be more information regarding this.

However it has been a long time that Stun is not included in the provisioning guides, this method is not secure and also it is always a headache using phones in this way... So it has been a long time and reasons to avoid using phones with stun.

 

[mcsphones]

So it has been a long time and reasons to avoid using phones with stun.

I don't disagree with that. I just want to be able to maintain existing functionality for customers; we can sell router phones for any new scenarios where Stun otherwise might have been used. But I think keeping the functionality available for on-prem installations, knowing they aren't supported, would still be preferred. Thanks!

 

[Alejandro_3CX]

@dougkinzinger @SweetAction I'm afraid that we will need to wait a little bit more to know further details about the incoming v20.

 

[mcsphones]

Ok thanks!

 

[Marc Fauser]

We use about 8 phones on different locations with Direct SIP / STUN and had no problem.
I don't mind using an SBC in the future or a router phone.
But we used Direct SIP / STUN because our employees work from home and are often at out customers and they take the phone with them and connect it at home or everywhere they have network.
How will this work in the future? With a router phone, I need to be in the same network which is not our use case.
Any suggestions?

 

[SteveITS]

@Marc Fauser Taking a Direct SIP/STUN phone home would/should require port forwarding on the home router. If you set the person up with a router phone, it connects through itself so becomes portable to anywhere, without router changes. The only issue is other phones in the office can't use that router phone as their SBC, because it might leave.

alt: use a mobile app, or Desktop App or web client with a headset.

 

[mcsphones]

We use about 8 phones on different locations with Direct SIP / STUN and had no problem.
I don't mind using an SBC in the future or a router phone.
But we used Direct SIP / STUN because our employees work from home and are often at out customers and they take the phone with them and connect it at home or everywhere they have network.
How will this work in the future? With a router phone, I need to be in the same network which is not our use case.
Any suggestions?

That's a good point; we keep a "burner phone" configured as a live Stun extension in our own system we use for demos and trials so potential customers can actually see & test; we bring it right to them. Works every time!

 

[mcsphones]

Taking a Direct SIP/STUN phone home would/should require port forwarding on the home router.

Hello there. At the moment, none of the Stun phones we have configured across our 2000+ managed extensions have any ports opened at the home or remote (far) site. They just plain work. I can give more details if needed; since this posting I went thru all our systems and did a Stun "audit" and that's how they are configured.

 

[SteveITS]

I think they pulled the docs but see here for instance: https://www.3cx.com/community/threa...-provisioned-yealink-phones.80533/post-370845

 

[SweetAction]

I once wrote this post abut using STUN and it still applies: https://www.3cx.com/community/threads/sbc-x-stun-which-and-when-to-use.77933/post-356680

TL;DR you can do STUN as long as anything that sits between the 3CX server and the IP Phone passes along every packet to the phone, regardless of if was solicited by the phone or not.

 

[SteveITS]

I've seen people say it works without port forwarding. I was referring to/going by the 3CX docs.

In any case a router phone is portable, and supported.

Clarity on whether existing phones will continue to work, or need reconfiguration, is needed. Changing a few isn't an issue as long as at least one at each location is capable of being a router phone. Changing a lot is going to take planning and a bunch of time over the next "n" months before v20 is released.

 

[Alexandre ITELIA]

@dougkinzinger @SweetAction I'm afraid that we will need to wait a little bit more to know further details about the incoming v20.

Hi,

I would like to confirm necessity to keep active stun for existing customer systems.
Without it, unable to proceed upgrade customers who use stun.

In 2020, STUN was massively used so Actually, lots of customers always have this system for their phones !

Thanks for work !

 

[N_G]

STUN is not reliable for mass deployment. However, v20 will still support custom templates so if you wish to use STUN you can use custom templates and of course you have to do support from A to Z.