[VoIP] Not the brightest bulb in the box.
Thomas McIntyre
baggins at well.com
Tue Jul 17 20:10:03 CDT 2007
Lee, the internet is forever and things have a way of getting where
you do not want them to go.
Your remark is quite mild and I do not doubt its accuracy, but would
you say this to the Chief in a town meeting?
Maybe I am overly cautious, but I know that I have made off the cuff
remarks that came back to haunt me.
Ok, back to my spot behind the couch.
Ton (the lurker)
On Jul 17, 2007, at 4:52 PM, voip-request at ckts.info wrote:
> Send VoIP mailing list submissions to
> voip at ckts.info
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> voip-request at ckts.info
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> voip-owner at ckts.info
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of VoIP digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Traditional PBX or VoIP Based? (David Josephson)
> 2. SIP question (Kirt Stanfield)
> 3. Re: SIP question (David Josephson)
> 4. Re: Traditional PBX or VoIP Based? (Lee Spenadel)
> 5. Re: Traditional PBX or VoIP Based? (Lee Spenadel)
> 6. Re: Traditional PBX or VoIP Based? (Mark Rudholm)
> 7. Re: Traditional PBX or VoIP Based? (Lee Spenadel)
>
> From: David Josephson <david at josephson.com>
> Date: July 17, 2007 11:14:30 AM PDT
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
> Reply-To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
>
>
> Only one main thing to add to what Dennis, John etc. have written.
> That is, it depends on *who* will be doing the planning, install
> and support. Find out who that will likely be, and what system they
> consider the most reliable.
>
> Yes, Asterisk is great, but there is no standard of installation
> competence and support that makes it work if you are gone. Some
> friends have deployed Asterisk in their companies (using Cisco 7940
> and 7960 phones, not the Linksys-origin ones) and they are happy --
> but they are Unix geeks and any one of them can fix things in
> fairly short order. This applies to all the "legacy" systems too --
> the key will be, who in your local community has the chops to
> support the system? There are good systems from Avaya (nee Lucent,
> nee AT&T, Bell Labs origin), NEC, Panasonic, Toshiba, Vodavi and
> others. I gather it's not a big system. The key is having it be
> just capable enough to do what the folks want it to do -- but not
> overwhelm them with features that will confuse them. FIgure out who
> you would send the RFQ to, and ask them -- what systems do you
> sell, what systems do your techs like working on most, on which
> systems will you release programming manuals and training to the
> end user technician so he (you) can make moves/adds/changes
> yourself? Beware of the latest and greatest. My choice would be
> Avaya Magix (or Legend, if they will accept refurb/NOS equipment)
> or Toshiba. But it really depends on what system has the best local
> support.
>
> Using an internet telephony provider is a real non-starter, unless
> you happen to have a secure circuit to the point where the telco
> hands off to the VOIP box. Even business-grade IP connectivity is
> not reliable enough for public safety uses, unless you have
> dedicated and redundant circuits to a well-engineered peering point.
>
> Where you can help the most is by analyzing the reliability of each
> proposed system -- how many single things can fail and take it
> down? Is there a backup or workaround? What's the mean time to repair?
>
> We went through a similar exercise a year or so ago at my shop
> here. We have up to 8 people working here, about a dozen
> extensions. I wanted something cheap but solid. It needed voicemail
> and caller ID, but nothing more fancy than that. I learned about
> the Avaya Legend stuff by downloading all the manuals and buying
> pieces on eBay. I think we spent a total of $800 or so for two
> dozen display stations, a T1 trunk (for interface to Asterisk),
> some 2-wire analog extensions and caller-ID trunks, voicemail,
> spare processors, etc.
>
> --
> David Josephson
>
>
>
>
> From: Kirt Stanfield <kirtley.stanfield at comcast.net>
> Date: July 17, 2007 11:28:21 AM PDT
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
> Subject: [VoIP] SIP question
> Reply-To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
>
>
> It has been my impression to date, that when two SIP phones are
> using the same network, the actual data packets are exchanged
> directly between them.
>
> Without thinking about it I have been assuming that this is also
> the case when the call is handled by asterisk.
>
> However I have had someone say to me that this is not the case, and
> that in that case, the data packets go through Asterisk.
>
> Any comments?
>
> Kirt Stanfield
>
>
>
>
>
> From: David Josephson <david at josephson.com>
> Date: July 17, 2007 11:45:45 AM PDT
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] SIP question
> Reply-To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
>
>
> Kirt Stanfield wrote:
>> It has been my impression to date, that when two SIP phones are
>> using the same network, the actual data packets are exchanged
>> directly between them.
>>
>> Without thinking about it I have been assuming that this is also
>> the case when the call is handled by asterisk.
>>
>> However I have had someone say to me that this is not the case,
>> and that in that case, the data packets go through Asterisk.
> It depends on whether canreinvite=yes in your sip.conf
>
> See a good explanation at http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/
> Asterisk+sip+canreinvite
>
> --
> David Josephson
>
>
>
>
> From: "Lee Spenadel" <lee at spenadel.com>
> Date: July 17, 2007 4:08:04 PM PDT
> To: "'Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches'" <voip at ckts.info>
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
> Reply-To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
>
>
> True, but municipalities/government agencies have certain minimum
> requirements that must be met in order to be considered. I don't
> meet (nor
> do I want to) those minimum requirements.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: voip-bounces at ckts.info [mailto:voip-bounces at ckts.info] On
> Behalf Of
> Dennis D Hock
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:53 AM
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches
> Cc: 'Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches'
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
>
> Lee as a maintainer of their computer system you are in a great
> position to
> know just how critical those communication devices can be and need
> to be
> treated.
>
> Dennis H.
>
> -----voip-bounces at ckts.info wrote: -----
>
>
> To: <jnovack at stromberg-carlson.org>, "'Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog
> Switches'" <voip at ckts.info>
> From: "Lee Spenadel" <lee at spenadel.com>
> Sent by: voip-bounces at ckts.info
> Date: 07/17/2007 10:02AM
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
>
> This is not something I would be installing - just creating the
> spec and
> putting it out to bid. To take on that liability with an Emergency
> services
> department is not something I am interested in. It's bad enough I
> maintain
> their computers.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: voip-bounces at ckts.info [mailto:voip-bounces at ckts.info] On
> Behalf Of
> John Novack
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:35 AM
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
>
>
>
> Lee Spenadel wrote:
>> E911 trunks terminate in to a separate E911 terminal maintained by
>> the
>> County. I haven't delved into that aspect of it and may not have to.
> I'd
>> be nervous looking at an Asterisk solution that is not fully
>> redundant
> with
>> some sort of hot-swap capability.
>>
>> Lee
>>
> I have to agree with Mark
>
> Asterisk for business, hospitals and emergency services, even the more
> mundane office type requirements is NOT a safe solution
> The so called "legacy" telephone systems are a much better
> solution, are
> much more reliable than any general purpose PC based solution, and,
> when
> ones time is factored in, cheaper.
> The 842 and 942 phones are OK for my desk, but I would NEVER sell then
> to a customer. No backlit display, mediocre sound quality and no power
> over Ethernet are all killers, IMO.
>
> Depending on requirements, a nice NEC system or systems, available
> through either Graybar or Target Distributing will give many years of
> reliable service at a really low cost. Voice mail in skin is available
> as well, that makes the Asterisk VM truly "Comedian Mail"
>
> Asterisk is fine for us to play with and connect or switches together,
> but if you put one in a real business, you had better be ready to
> babysit the system, the users, and do LOTS of customizing.
> Also, better crank up the limits on your business liability policy!
>
> John Novack
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: voip-bounces at ckts.info [mailto:voip-bounces at ckts.info] On
>> Behalf Of
>> Mark Rudholm
>> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 11:17 PM
>> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches
>> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
>>
>> Honestly, I'm not sure I'd trust emergency services to
>> Asterisk. A well-designed IP network can be made to be
>> very robust and reliable, but most are not. Asterisk
>> can be made to be reasonably reliable, but ultimately
>> PC hardware (and general-purpose OSes) can't match the
>> uptime of purpose-built hardware running an embedded
>> real-time OS.
>>
>> Now, if they have a good radio system for emergency
>> communication and the phones are just sort of a day-to-day
>> thing, then sure.
>>
>> How are (E)911 calls being handled?
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoIP mailing list
>> VoIP at ckts.info
>> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
>> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoIP mailing list
>> VoIP at ckts.info
>> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
>> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>>
>>
>
> --
> Dog is my co-pilot
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoIP mailing list
> VoIP at ckts.info
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoIP mailing list
> VoIP at ckts.info
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voipProject Web Page:
> http://www.ckts.info/
> _______________________________________________
> VoIP mailing list
> VoIP at ckts.info
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "Lee Spenadel" <lee at spenadel.com>
> Date: July 17, 2007 4:14:50 PM PDT
> To: "'Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches'" <voip at ckts.info>
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
> Reply-To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
>
>
> This community is comprised of roughly 3300 year round residents.
> The Town
> does not have much of a budget. I would consider all options, but
> as a
> consultant I will educate the decision makers about the pro's and
> con's of
> all options. But frankly I can't suggest an Asterisk solution for
> such a
> critical application, especially when there's no local expertise (I
> wouldn't
> call me local expertise) and no means for redundant operations.
>
> Local support plays a major role in the decision. I live on Cape
> Cod, a
> place not served by a lots of telephony sales firms. So it has to be
> something serviceable. I don't even know if this project will go
> through -
> the Chief called me yesterday in a panic over learning that the
> architects
> don't spec the communications systems. He actually thought that the
> architects spec out the features, set types, trunks, etc. Not the
> brightest
> bulb in the box.
>
> Lee
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: voip-bounces at ckts.info [mailto:voip-bounces at ckts.info] On
> Behalf Of
> David Josephson
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 2:15 PM
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
>
> Only one main thing to add to what Dennis, John etc. have written.
> That
> is, it depends on *who* will be doing the planning, install and
> support.
> Find out who that will likely be, and what system they consider the
> most
> reliable.
>
> Yes, Asterisk is great, but there is no standard of installation
> competence and support that makes it work if you are gone. Some
> friends
> have deployed Asterisk in their companies (using Cisco 7940 and 7960
> phones, not the Linksys-origin ones) and they are happy -- but they
> are
> Unix geeks and any one of them can fix things in fairly short order.
> This applies to all the "legacy" systems too -- the key will be,
> who in
> your local community has the chops to support the system? There are
> good
> systems from Avaya (nee Lucent, nee AT&T, Bell Labs origin), NEC,
> Panasonic, Toshiba, Vodavi and others. I gather it's not a big system.
> The key is having it be just capable enough to do what the folks
> want it
> to do -- but not overwhelm them with features that will confuse them.
> FIgure out who you would send the RFQ to, and ask them -- what systems
> do you sell, what systems do your techs like working on most, on which
> systems will you release programming manuals and training to the end
> user technician so he (you) can make moves/adds/changes yourself?
> Beware
> of the latest and greatest. My choice would be Avaya Magix (or Legend,
> if they will accept refurb/NOS equipment) or Toshiba. But it really
> depends on what system has the best local support.
>
> Using an internet telephony provider is a real non-starter, unless you
> happen to have a secure circuit to the point where the telco hands off
> to the VOIP box. Even business-grade IP connectivity is not reliable
> enough for public safety uses, unless you have dedicated and redundant
> circuits to a well-engineered peering point.
>
> Where you can help the most is by analyzing the reliability of each
> proposed system -- how many single things can fail and take it
> down? Is
> there a backup or workaround? What's the mean time to repair?
>
> We went through a similar exercise a year or so ago at my shop
> here. We
> have up to 8 people working here, about a dozen extensions. I wanted
> something cheap but solid. It needed voicemail and caller ID, but
> nothing more fancy than that. I learned about the Avaya Legend
> stuff by
> downloading all the manuals and buying pieces on eBay. I think we
> spent
> a total of $800 or so for two dozen display stations, a T1 trunk (for
> interface to Asterisk), some 2-wire analog extensions and caller-ID
> trunks, voicemail, spare processors, etc.
>
> --
> David Josephson
> _______________________________________________
> VoIP mailing list
> VoIP at ckts.info
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Mark Rudholm <mark at rudholm.com>
> Date: July 17, 2007 4:23:08 PM PDT
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
> Reply-To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
>
>
> Lee Spenadel wrote:
>> This community is comprised of roughly 3300 year round residents.
>> The Town
>> does not have much of a budget. I would consider all options, but
>> as a
>> consultant I will educate the decision makers about the pro's and
>> con's of
>> all options. But frankly I can't suggest an Asterisk solution for
>> such a
>> critical application, especially when there's no local expertise
>> (I wouldn't
>> call me local expertise) and no means for redundant operations.
>>
>> Local support plays a major role in the decision. I live on Cape
>> Cod, a
>> place not served by a lots of telephony sales firms. So it has to be
>> something serviceable. I don't even know if this project will go
>> through -
>> the Chief called me yesterday in a panic over learning that the
>> architects
>> don't spec the communications systems. He actually thought that the
>> architects spec out the features, set types, trunks, etc. Not the
>> brightest
>> bulb in the box.
>
> Do people still use Centrex?
>
> It has some advantages that might be appropriate for a municipal
> emergency services facility; no capital costs, no maintenance,
> very high reliability even when power is out, no surprises.
>
> Probably not the cheapest or most flexible solution, but at least
> your phones will work.
>
>
>
>
> From: "Lee Spenadel" <lee at spenadel.com>
> Date: July 17, 2007 4:52:09 PM PDT
> To: "'Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches'" <voip at ckts.info>
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
> Reply-To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
>
>
> The town uses Centrex as trunks and pops in a key system at each
> office/building. Centrex is an option, especially if they offer
> station
> sets with features.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: voip-bounces at ckts.info [mailto:voip-bounces at ckts.info] On
> Behalf Of
> Mark Rudholm
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 7:23 PM
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Traditional PBX or VoIP Based?
>
> Lee Spenadel wrote:
>> This community is comprised of roughly 3300 year round residents.
>> The
> Town
>> does not have much of a budget. I would consider all options, but
>> as a
>> consultant I will educate the decision makers about the pro's and
>> con's of
>> all options. But frankly I can't suggest an Asterisk solution for
>> such a
>> critical application, especially when there's no local expertise (I
> wouldn't
>> call me local expertise) and no means for redundant operations.
>>
>> Local support plays a major role in the decision. I live on Cape
>> Cod, a
>> place not served by a lots of telephony sales firms. So it has to be
>> something serviceable. I don't even know if this project will go
>> through
> -
>> the Chief called me yesterday in a panic over learning that the
>> architects
>> don't spec the communications systems. He actually thought that the
>> architects spec out the features, set types, trunks, etc. Not the
> brightest
>> bulb in the box.
>
> Do people still use Centrex?
>
> It has some advantages that might be appropriate for a municipal
> emergency services facility; no capital costs, no maintenance,
> very high reliability even when power is out, no surprises.
>
> Probably not the cheapest or most flexible solution, but at least
> your phones will work.
> _______________________________________________
> VoIP mailing list
> VoIP at ckts.info
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoIP mailing list
> VoIP at ckts.info
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
Thomas Mcintyre
Baggins at Well.com
285 States Street
San Francisco, CA 94114-1405
Support Camp Mather - http://www.campmather.com
More information about the VoIP
mailing list