Those are pretty neat units, but when I price out a solution using one of those the cost often ends up being more than replacing the sets. The CitelLink is technically a sound strategy, but the price is tough to sell.
Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Philip Mullis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: July 28, 2006 8:25 AM > To: Jim Van Meggelen > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [on-asterisk] PoE > > Little bit of topic but For SMEs with 10+ phones that want to > go ip :) and don't want to replace there old Nortel/pbx phone > sets or have the inconvenience of running new data cables, > you could use something like a Citel gateway :) > > Phil. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Van Meggelen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: July 28, 2006 12:55 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [on-asterisk] PoE > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Lange [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: July 27, 2006 12:18 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] PoE > > > > On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 11:51 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote: > > > John> One of the major selling features of VoIP is > > convergence. If > > > John> you are running parallel networks you are giving > > up one of the > > > John> major selling points. > > > > > > I agree. That's why I would hesistate to install a new > > network, when > > > at a similar price, you can fix the existing network. > > > > > > The catch is that you need phones that can do VLANs: to > avoid as > > > many cable runs as possible, you need to plug the desktop > > PCs into the > > > phones. Oops, back to needing the really expensive phones. > > > > What phones are you using? Granstream, Linksys, Polycom all support > > both VLAN (802.1Q) and Layer 3 QOS. > > > > The point I'm driving at here is reusing the CAT3 network > is not only > > more problematic but its also not any less expensive than fixing the > > CAT5 LAN. As a bonus the customer also benefits from having > their LAN > > fixed which is something they probably need done anyhow. > > > > Why spend more money retrofitting the CAT3 (which will still have > > issues) when you could spend less upgrading the CAT5 and solve not > > only the VoIP issues but their general LAN issues as well? > > > > What am I missing here? > > Probably nothing. It is generally going to come down to what > can be sold to the customer. I find that re-using the cat3 is > not expensive at all, however I could see a day in the > not-too-distant future where the cost of a managed network > would not be excessive. I certainly am not of the mind that > one way is better than the other; each environment has to be > evaluated on its own. > In some cases re-using the voice wiring makes sense, in > others it will not. > > In many SMEs there is an office and a plant area, and if you > have ten phones in the plant that do not have an ethernet > drop, you are going to have to think carefully about the cost > of cabling. Running cables in plants is not cheap. > > Jim > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.4/401 - Release Date: > 26/07/2006 > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.4/402 - Release > Date: 27/07/2006 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.4/402 - Release Date: 27/07/2006
