SIP Provider
-
That's the trick. If you have a high density environment, i'd do either a dedicated network to your VoIP service or get two ISP connections and a load balancer with QoS. Either way, i usually recommend QoS. If your ISP provides your SIP they can provision SIP priority on the delivery side of your pipe.
-
@Hubtech said:
That's the trick. If you have a high density environment, i'd do either a dedicated network to your VoIP service or get two ISP connections and a load balancer with QoS. Either way, i usually recommend QoS. If your ISP provides your SIP they can provision SIP priority on the delivery side of your pipe.
I spoke to Cox about SIP, they can provide it, but they will only do so for solutions that they have certified, and it must come over it's own connection outside of your internet connection (which in theory is fine... but you find yourself bound to that specific ISP).
-
Yes. They give it its own "pipe" so they can Guarantee a certain level of service.
-
@dashrender - I did mean ISP pricing, yes.
I tend to agree with Hubtech about the possibility of getting another connection installed for VOIP traffic (whether it be point-to-point SIP from a telco or just an internet connection and 3rd party SIP provider). Point-to-point SIP does bind you to the provider as you say. So then it comes down to what is more important to management - the guarantee of call quality or the flexibility to get calls anywhere if the worst happens.
-
At my last gig, Windstream was the provider, though it was Nuvox first (before they were bought out.
Their support staff were pretty good, and there was a team designated for the specific system we used at the time. (which was Shoretel) -
@NetworkNerd said:
Elastix plays really, really well as a VM. I think it likes ESXi best personally, but Scott may disagree.
Xen PV would be my first choice. vSphere second. HyperV third. KVM last.
-
@scottalanmiller Xen over VMware? I'm curious as to why.
-
@Dashrender said:
@NetworkNerd said:
I actually really like Broadvox (recently acquired by Fusion and named NBS) in addition to the others that were recommended here.
The phone bill is literally about $400 or less for 4 companies and 15 concurrent calls. That is amazing compared to what it was when we had PRI.
$400 a month for basically 15 lines I guess that's good. I think we pay around $500 for a PRI (23 lines) so $400 doesn't seem like such a deal.
Well you can't just compare lines to lines. Phone lines aren't sold that way. Have to compare DIDs, minutes, lines, etc. Lots of possible factors. And is $500 base or after tax because SIP isn't taxes like PRI is (one is legally phone, one is not.) Generally SIP comes with a lot more features.
-
@Dashrender said:
@NetworkNerd said:
Remember you will want 87-100Kbps of upload bandwidth per concurrent call. I can definitely understand having a tough time swallowing ISP pricing, but if it is going to ensure phone clarity,management will pay it.
What do you mean? ISP Pricing? If I'm using a SIP provider that is not my ISP, don't I simply have to ensure I leave enough available bandwidth open for incoming calls (not really sure how to do that?), Outgoing is easy to handle through QOS, but incoming? Our 6 meg pipe spends most of the day saturated because of our cloud EMR and VPN tunnels to other branches.
A saturated link will cause problems.
-
@Dashrender said:
@Hubtech said:
That's the trick. If you have a high density environment, i'd do either a dedicated network to your VoIP service or get two ISP connections and a load balancer with QoS. Either way, i usually recommend QoS. If your ISP provides your SIP they can provision SIP priority on the delivery side of your pipe.
I spoke to Cox about SIP, they can provide it, but they will only do so for solutions that they have certified, and it must come over it's own connection outside of your internet connection (which in theory is fine... but you find yourself bound to that specific ISP).
Yes, sadly doing this you end up being tied to your SIP provider just as if they were a PRI. It saves on taxes and sometimes adds some flexibility but often you gain little to nothing because all the real benefits of a neutral technology are taken away.
-
@Katie said:
At my last gig, Windstream was the provider, though it was Nuvox first (before they were bought out.
Their support staff were pretty good, and there was a team designated for the specific system we used at the time. (which was Shoretel)Windstream is the rebranding of Paetech from Rochester. They changed their identity presumably to overcome the horrific reputation that they had built. I've worked with them before and they were both technically unable to deliver their solutions and unreliable even when they did. I've heard a lot of horror stories of people dealing with Windstream. Lots of outages, inability to get support, etc.
-
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller Xen over VMware? I'm curious as to why.
Paravirtualization. That's why Xen was able to run Asterisk rock solid about five years before VMware even had it working at all. There was a time when Xen was the only way to do this. Now they've all improved to a point where they can all do it. But Xen remains the only option for pure PV.
-
@scottalanmiller Correct. Windstream, Patech, Cavelier all the same shiz. and shiz they are.
