[VoIP] DP-compatible ATAs

[Steph Kerman]

At some point I expect to have an on-premise *.  I own traditional D4 
channel banks with various card types I could connect to it.  Hell will 
probably freeze over before I will feel like paying $375 for a T1 
interface card.  Just not worth it to me. 

I wonder how many others are eager to spend this kind of money.  If I 
understand correctly, a number of people who bought those "most 
economical candidates" wasted their money, ending up with non-working 
cards.  Please bring me up to date.  What does it cost to buy a new, 
warranteed one?

To my way of thinking, senderizing my XB and using it as the tandem for 
the SXS units is a better expenditure of energy with a more interesting 
result than doing it with an *.

"Different strokes..."

Steph

Chad Perkins wrote:
> Perhaps not too many. But the PCI/Asterisk and/or PCI/Asterisk/Channel 
> bank "models" not only gives the greatest flexibility and features, it 
> also provides a non-blocking architecture for multiple DIDs; even when 
> front ending a single EM switch. Not having an on site Asterisk with 
> analog ports (or channel bank) is going to make having DIDs painfully 
> awkward.
>
> For some, the Asterisk will/can also provide the tandem function 
> between the EM switches. From a historical perspective it may not be 
> desirable to reconfigure and/or rewire EM machines to interface with 
> one another. How many changes do I want to make to a historically 
> significant #3XB? My answer is as few as possible. So in my preferred 
> scenario Asterisk becomes an invisible part of the "network". This 
> value increased by the ease of which Asterisk can do digit absorbtion 
> and translation, once again relieving the need rewire/configure machines.
>
> Chad
>
>
> On 28 Dec 2006 at 10:10, Steph Kerman wrote:
> [snip]
>> I also wonder how many people will have trunks to so many switches 
>> and need independent trunks at that. Most SXS systems can have trunk 
>> outlets from a selector level of different exchanges multipled to the 
>> same OGT. I'm even sharing trunk equipment between my SXS and XB 
>> systems. So unless the traffic requires it, it's not obvious to me 
>> what is accomplished by having an independent pair of OGTs to the * 
>> box from each distinct exchange.
>>
>> Steph
>   
>