Yeastar in there documentation mentions VLAN's only need after 200 endpoints on the network are in use. With other PBX's I have installed I always set up VLAN's. The current deployment I'm working on and first with Yeastar has 28 Yealink handsets.
Do I need VLANS
Can you auto provision using VLANS set up example
LAN DATA 192.168.90.0 Untagged
LAN PBX 192.168.100.0 TAGGED Traffic
Will the phones still see the broadcast from the Yeastar ? Any suggestion I thank you in advance
Vlans are mostly a personal preference and to some extent, a trade-off. However, this depends on the needs beyond the so-called "best practice" to have a Vlan for voice and another for data.
The true best practice is to have physically segregated networks for voice and data.....but, this is not very cost effective and adds a level of complexity due to all the duplicated hardware and ISP costs.
A Vlan by itself does nothing more than to use the same physical network and share it with other devices across a broadcast domain, so that those devices that are members of the (same) Vlan will receive the needed data packets, while non-members will not. It is a method of using a single wire to deliver data to some and not others and you can create multiples so that different groups will get their data and not that of the others - think something like groups named - payroll, executive staff, sales, voice. Each may have data that is unique and of a sensitive nature such that none of the aforementioned need to share data other than perhaps the voice. A different Vlan could be created for each, but the phone would all share the same. So a phone in payroll might have be Vlan #2 voice as would the phone in sales, but the data Van for payroll might be 20 and then 40 for sales.
Vlans add data to the network, so there is some overhead.
So, if there is a need to try and isolate the voice data, then a Vlan offers value.
The one thing to keep in mind is that a Vlan by itself does NOTHING to enhance the voice. It if did, then all Vlans would enhance whatever data was on a given Vlan. A Vlan does not increase bandwidth.
What has happened is that a number of switch manufacturers have developed auto-vlan or voice vlan set-ups that when one specifies certain information needed by the switch manufacturer, the switch will establish the Vlan and then apply QoS settings to same with little to no further user intervention required.
In my opinion, this convenience factor has helped to drive the notion that (voice) Vlans are a necessity.
My take is that at the end of the day, the same pipes are in use and they can only deliver whatever the slowest link in the path to their destination will allow. The QoS algorithms do not come into play until and unless the device in question knows what the bandwidth limit is and then senses that the limit is being reached. Only then will it start to prioritize packets one over another. Even then, most phones have settings that allow for QoS settings at both a layer 2 and 3 level. Even many IP-PBX systems can tag the SIP and RTP packets for the same reason. It is about the internal network capacity combined with the need for segregating packets for destinations across the domain where some packets are not to be seen by others.
At the router side, not so much as when the packets traverse to the WAN both the QoS and Vlan is meaningless. However, if you have a slow Internet and a robust internal network whose demands may tax the external bandwidth at times, then QoS is a must, but even then, it can only do so much. If it reaches saturation, it too will not be able to keep up and voice will become impacted despite the QoS.
So, the bottom line is to understand the network and equipment as best you can along with the client needs and expected utilization. Do I suggest QoS...absolutely as you never know if and when it may be needed. Do I automatically suggest a Vlan......no, not unless there is a need for the segregation. This by itself dictates the need and if the QoS comes along with it, great. I can always set the QoS on many devices without the need for a Vlan. All data still passes the same devices on their way to their respective devices - Vlan or not.
There is one other aspect that may make a Vlan advantageous. If there is a site with many devices, then having a Vlan, may be advantageous as it limits the amount of data that a network interface may have to deal with when doing captures or other maintenance. The NIC still has to examine the packet and accept or ignore, but at least when examinig a capture it makes the file smaller and therefore easier to manage.
Yes, the broadcast should be seen as long as the switches will pass multi-cast and the Yealink phones discovery uses same....I assume the PBX will already be on the Vlan. If the switches you have support the auto-Vlan with the associated QoS, then make use of it...nothing to lose. Set QoS for voice at the router.
Thank You