Thanks Leandro for your comments.
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Leandro Dardini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 2012/7/30 Kannan <[email protected]> > >> Hi >> >> I came across couple of pointers on the Internet regarding solutions >> available for providing hosted PBX service. >> >> 1. Multiple PBXs: Using separate hardware to host each PBX. Pretty >> straightforward, but no hosting company wants to use it. >> 2. Multi-tenant PBX: Configuring multiple PBXs within the same instance >> of Asterisk. I.e. partitioning a single instance of Asterisk into multiple >> PBXs by way of configurations, using unique landing context for each tenant. >> 3. Virtual PBX: Multiple virtual machines within the same hardware, each >> host an instance of Asterisk. >> >> Which one of the method above is generally used by hosted PBX service >> providers? >> >> Isn't the second option with ARA a good choice for dynamic creation of >> multiple "small" PBX tenants? >> >> Is the last option alone or combination of options 2 and 3 good for cloud >> based hosted PBX service offering? >> >> Thanks, >> Kannan. >> > > Working in the voip field from a lots of years, I have found all three > type of business. > > The first is maybe the easier and most common. Hardware is cheap and it is > easier to "sell" a service like the PBX if it is sold together with a piece > of iron. Usually the hardware is placed on client's network, using the > bandwidth of the client. Usually together with the PBX is sold also a > router/firewall/traffic shaper/vpn endpoint to try to optimize the traffic > on the client's DSL. > > The major pros about this solution is you can use a normal PBX like > freepbx/trixbox, the client can mess the config how he likes, without > disrupting other services, you can install VoIP card to connect landlines,. > > The major cons is the cost of the hardware, the cost of the g.729 licenses > (if any) and the maintenance cost of replacing hardware failures and the > need to be physically near each client. > > The second is the holy grail of the VoIP providers. > > The major pros is the cost. Having a single hardware is cheap and it is > still cheap also if you decide to get two to be ready in case of an > hardware failure. > > The major cons is the software. You cannot use the award winning > freepbx/trixbox family and you need to deal with sometime limited or > incomplete developed interfaces. The client always asks for the missing > feature. One other major cons is the "reload". If the PBX software is not > made using ARA, then every time you add a new peer or a new DID, you need > to reload the entire PBX and that is a resource killer. Again, if the pbx > interface is not made using ARA, then you cannot let your clients to change > the configuration or they will trigger continuous reload (and delaying > reload for example every 10 minutes is not a solution) > > The last one is sometime the chosen compromise, but from my point of view, > pbxes are not good software to virtualize. They are too sensible to delays > and your voice quality can go down if the real server is overloaded. > > The same for the cloud based solutions (I have yet to found). I suspect > the "cloud" is good for services like http, not for real time applications. > > Leandro > > > -- > _____________________________________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: > http://www.asterisk.org/hello > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
