On-Premises soft PBX
-
@PhlipElder ok it's in your chat window. feel free to get back whenever it hits the top of your pile.
-
Not that this adds anything to this thread. We've been using FreePBX for 6 years now. I wouldn't use anything else at this point. Support is top notch. Everything works and I can figure things out if needed. I built our system with little help from FreePBX at the time but now that Sangoma has taken over it just gets better and better.
-
@PhlipElder said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@scottalanmiller said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@PhlipElder said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Pete-S said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@scottalanmiller said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Pete-S said in On-Premises soft PBX:
We installed and ran a couple of options to see what would work best for us and for our needs 3CX was the clear winner.
We are running the debian version of 3CX on xenserver. It has worked very well.
What did you test against? Was FreePBX one of the options?
There are loads of things worse than 3CX, like Mitel or Cisco that we've found. No question there.
Of course we tried freepbx.
Okay, so we can look at 3CX or FreePBX as two options.
What else do we need to make this work?
I jumped on FreePBX's site for a boo and there's something there about a SIP Trunk?
They make their money trying to sell you things. FreePBX is totally free and can use any SIP trunk you want. But you are welcome to buy SIP trunks from them directly, if you so desire.
That's the catch. I'm not sure what is needed and from where given our location in Canada.
Being in Canada doesn't really change much. You just need vendors that support Canada. I know that voip.ms does. You don't need anything that they sell.
-
@Skyetel does US and Canada, as well.
-
I was looking at the Sangoma IP phones after my curiosity was piqued for FreePBX. When it says that it supports, say, 3 SIP accounts. What exactly is that; is that like an extension or what?
-
@wrx7m said in On-Premises soft PBX:
I was looking at the Sangoma IP phones after my curiosity was piqued for FreePBX. When it says that it supports, say, 3 SIP accounts. What exactly is that; is that like an extension or what?
That means you can register 3 distinct extensions on it. Same PBX or different, etc.
I have 4 different extensions on my phone now from different clients.
I rarely ever use them, mostly if a problem is reported, I can verify.
-
@JaredBusch Same here, we rarely use more than one, and when we do it is almost always because we are a phone consultancy and not because it is practical on its own. I have no customers using anything like that.
-
@wrx7m said in On-Premises soft PBX:
I was looking at the Sangoma IP phones after my curiosity was piqued for FreePBX.
I don't like them. I got a s500 for attending a seminar in person. It works fine at a basic level, but the reliance on the phone apps for everything just makes doing things slow.
So that makes it not worth the premium IMO. The ability to freely use the commercial EPM is not worth it.
EPM is not that expensive anyway.
-
@JaredBusch said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@wrx7m said in On-Premises soft PBX:
I was looking at the Sangoma IP phones after my curiosity was piqued for FreePBX.
I don't like them. I got a s500 for attending a seminar in person. It works fine at a basic level, but the reliance on the phone apps for everything just makes doing things slow.
So that makes it not worth the premium IMO. The ability to freely use the commercial EPM is not worth it.
EPM is not that expensive anyway.
My dad uses one (he is retired from NTG) and it works fine, I use it when I take over his office. But I prefer my Yealinks for sure.
-
@scottalanmiller said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@JaredBusch said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@wrx7m said in On-Premises soft PBX:
I was looking at the Sangoma IP phones after my curiosity was piqued for FreePBX.
I don't like them. I got a s500 for attending a seminar in person. It works fine at a basic level, but the reliance on the phone apps for everything just makes doing things slow.
So that makes it not worth the premium IMO. The ability to freely use the commercial EPM is not worth it.
EPM is not that expensive anyway.
My dad uses one (he is retired from NTG) and it works fine, I use it when I take over his office. But I prefer my Yealinks for sure.
Yeah, it works quite well just for phone calls.
-
Which yealink model(s) do you guys like?
-
@wrx7m said in On-Premises soft PBX:
Which yealink model(s) do you guys like?
Personally for low cost phones, the T42S is really nice. Nothing special, very cheap, but gives a solid air of quality. Looks good on the desk, works great. This is the majority of what we support (I literally think over 50% of all phones we support are these.)
I have lots of T19 E2 out there, they are super bare bones, but they still look and feel nice. The T48S is the bomb, though, with the crazy touch screen. I was using one two weeks go, so jealous that I don't have one of my own.
-
The T2xx series is fine, but really looks and feels pretty cheap. (That's what I use in my won office, ho hum.) The T4xx series really steps it up and is the line I'd spend my own money on if I was buying today.
We have loads and loads of T2xx and T3xx in our office because of the era that we were investing in phones.
-
We currently have Shoretel/Mitel Connect, on-prem. We have IP230G, IP480G and IP485G phones. Do you know if they are compatible with freepbx?
-
We went with Yealink T41S. It's a simple business phone.
They're the same as T42S but 100Mbit instead of 1Gbit (who cares?) and a bit lower in cost.
We paid about $70 USD ea for them just buying online, not through a VAR.
We use 3CX and 3CX have a windows application that integrates with supported phones. So you can dial from windows and your phone will place the call. It's basically like remote control of the phone.
There are a bunch of other functions too, the software can for instance be used as a softphone itself. So your computer will work as a phone. You need a headset to hook up to your computer though for it to be practical. But it actually works very well.
There is a web interface as well to the PBX. Too many functions to list here but it can do some of the things that the windows application can.
I'm just writing this because it may not be apparent to someone who is not used to voip that you don't actually need physical phones. If you had a call center or something you would just use computers and headsets.
-
@Pete-S said in On-Premises soft PBX:
We went with Yealink T41S. It's a simple business phone.
They're the same as T42S but 100Mbit instead of 1Gbit (who cares?) and a bit lower in cost.You care when you're using them as a passthrough for a PC. Then you only need one switch port instead of two.
-
@Dashrender said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Pete-S said in On-Premises soft PBX:
We went with Yealink T41S. It's a simple business phone.
They're the same as T42S but 100Mbit instead of 1Gbit (who cares?) and a bit lower in cost.You care when you're using them as a passthrough for a PC. Then you only need one switch port instead of two.
We've got customers who still have 25 year old cabling and live on 100Mb/s believe it or not. We have been deploying 100Mb/s passthrough phones for them.
-
@scottalanmiller said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Dashrender said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Pete-S said in On-Premises soft PBX:
We went with Yealink T41S. It's a simple business phone.
They're the same as T42S but 100Mbit instead of 1Gbit (who cares?) and a bit lower in cost.You care when you're using them as a passthrough for a PC. Then you only need one switch port instead of two.
We've got customers who still have 25 year old cabling and live on 100Mb/s believe it or not. We have been deploying 100Mb/s passthrough phones for them.
I didn't say there wasn't a case. If we make the switch - I'm going to be seeing if I can get a good enough signal on CAT 3 cabling for some phones to prevent me having to run new cable - in those cases, 100 Mb/s phones would be fine.
-
@Dashrender said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@scottalanmiller said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Dashrender said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Pete-S said in On-Premises soft PBX:
We went with Yealink T41S. It's a simple business phone.
They're the same as T42S but 100Mbit instead of 1Gbit (who cares?) and a bit lower in cost.You care when you're using them as a passthrough for a PC. Then you only need one switch port instead of two.
We've got customers who still have 25 year old cabling and live on 100Mb/s believe it or not. We have been deploying 100Mb/s passthrough phones for them.
I didn't say there wasn't a case. If we make the switch - I'm going to be seeing if I can get a good enough signal on CAT 3 cabling for some phones to prevent me having to run new cable - in those cases, 100 Mb/s phones would be fine.
There is absolutely no reason that you cannot do fast ethernet on cat three. That is in the design spec
That said I would recommend sticking with the same model phone or at least the same physical form factor add a minimum just to make things simpler to manage.
-
@JaredBusch said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Dashrender said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@scottalanmiller said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Dashrender said in On-Premises soft PBX:
@Pete-S said in On-Premises soft PBX:
We went with Yealink T41S. It's a simple business phone.
They're the same as T42S but 100Mbit instead of 1Gbit (who cares?) and a bit lower in cost.You care when you're using them as a passthrough for a PC. Then you only need one switch port instead of two.
We've got customers who still have 25 year old cabling and live on 100Mb/s believe it or not. We have been deploying 100Mb/s passthrough phones for them.
I didn't say there wasn't a case. If we make the switch - I'm going to be seeing if I can get a good enough signal on CAT 3 cabling for some phones to prevent me having to run new cable - in those cases, 100 Mb/s phones would be fine.
There is absolutely no reason that you cannot do fast ethernet on cat three. That is in the design spec
That said I would recommend sticking with the same model phone or at least the same physical form factor add a minimum just to make things simpler to manage.
That makes sense, sticking with the same physical form factor. Even though I know we could get along with those super cheap phones in most of these places I'm talking about.
