Jon Pounder wrote: > John Novack wrote: >> If this is an emergency phone situation then I would question the >> wisdom of even considering using Asterisk. >> Conventional telephony solutions exist that will easily cover the >> loop length and provide the reliability that should be required by >> risk management in such a situation. >> > why are you going on the assumption asterisk is somehow inherently > less reliable than a "conventional" solution ? > Because it is. A simple solution is best. fewer items to fail. The OP has given no reason to develop a complex solution for what is presented as a fairly simple problem to provide communications in an emergency situation over a short loop in conventional telephony 3Km isn't a long loop in the telephone world, though some postings would incorrectly say otherwise. > I am not trying to start any sort of war here, but is that based on > any sort of facts ? hardware wise its basically all the same > electronics whether they were meant as a general purpose computer or a > telephony specific computer - they all fail eventually and the MTBF is > usually related to the relative price in the specific market. Why do you assume a "telephony specific computer" is even needed?
KISS! John Novack -- Dog is my co-pilot _______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
