The issue is that there are many many businesses that are big enough
that they need DIDs and shared lines but aren't nearly big enough for
digital technology.

There is a gaping hole in phone services that stretches between about 5
users and 75 users. They need the features that T1/PRIs offer but don't
need, and can't afford 23 channels.

John

On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 11:57 -0400, Henry Coleman [VoIP-PBX.ca] wrote:
> Hi, I have implemented Direct in Dial Trunks (DIDs) in Canada using a 
> Mitel SX100 PBX  in 1986
> but I would not advise you to use this technology. It really doesn't 
> offer any advantage over digital lines
> The first problem is that the three or four digits that get passed to 
> the PBX must represent extension number directly or must be mapped to an 
> extension range (a feature not always available).
> The second limitation is the number of simultanious calls
> All in all, the technology is better left to history.
> A digital trunk servicing each extension is far less expensive and 
> offers much more flexability.
> I would see if you can port the existing number range to an ITSP (or get 
> a consecutive group of digital lines)
> These trunks could then directly ring an extension and if unanswered 
> could be diverted to a receptionist
> to take messages or go to Vmail.  This is the basic functionality of 
> analog DID and is a "piece of cake" to implement with Asterisk.
> 
> Henry
> 
> 
>    
> 
>  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> >That's what I don't understand John.  This analog signalling is common in 
> >the US as well. The old TASCOM PBX that we have was built in Chino, CA.  
> >Analog DID lines seem to be commonly supported on the old as well as new 
> >PBXs (for compatibility reasons). I think this was done because the PBX has 
> >considered an autonomous unit: self powered and self provisioned, hands 
> >off by the Telco.  The only reason I can think that Asterisk doesn't support 
> >the full version of DID directly is that no one has worked on drivers for 
> >the 
> >cards.  Brooktrout seems to have some.  This looks like a gaping hole to me.
> >
> >The E&M Winkstart applies only to E1 digital connections. Sure DID is 
> >supported on Asterisk, but only in terms of the dialing protocol. Anyone 
> >else 
> >have any insight into this lack of support for the full DID trunk line 
> >circuits? 
> >Are we talking legacy here?  Is ISDN expected to fill the gap? If so, this 
> >cuts 
> >out support for small message service businesses (in some locales) that 
> >can't afford a T1/E1.  Of course, the digital deals are probably better in 
> >other 
> >markets.  Maybe T1s are less that $1K in the larger cities.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Peter M.
> >
> >  
> >
> >>On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 16:23 -0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Perhaps some of you are not aware of how the old DID lines work.  When the 
> >>>incoming call 
> >>>is transferred to one of these trunks, 48 volts must be present. The CO 
> >>>switch seizes the 
> >>>line and polarity is reversed by the PBX to indicate ability to receive 
> >>>the call.  This is called 
> >>>wink start.  Four digits from the bank of DID numbers are then transferred 
> >>>and the call is 
> >>>connected.  It is a standard ability of a real PBX since it has been 
> >>>traditionally assumed that 
> >>>DID trunking can be handled by a PBX.  In fact, a lot of the new IP PBXs 
> >>>out there do this 
> >>>form of DID, also known as DID-over-analog.  A few of these lines are much 
> >>>cheaper to run 
> >>>than a T1.  That's why I'm disappointed that there doesn't seem to be any 
> >>>direct support for 
> >>>DID cards on Asterisk.  We have two sets of these trunk lines to support 
> >>>but it needs to 
> >>>function for the messaging service to start.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>According to 
> >>http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/index.php?page=Asterisk+config+zapata.conf
> >>
> >>Asterisk supports the following signalling types: 
> >>      * em: E & M Immediate Start
> >>      * em_w: E & M Wink Start
> >>...
> >>
> >>The description you gave above seems to be E & M Wink start.
> >>
> >>I hadn't been aware of this type of signaling until you brought this up.
> >>Is it commonly available in Canada?
> >>
> >>John
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >********************************************************
> >Peter MacFarlane, ACP
> >Network Administration &  Programming     
> >Target Call Center/ Message Centre P.E.I.  
> >*****************************************************************
> >OpenBSD's PF Firewall: Now available with CARP Failover.
> >Nothing to do with fish, but everything to do with security!
> >*****************************************************************
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 

Reply via email to