Hi List,
I am working on to finalize the SBC vendor for one of our environments. I have a couple of queries related to the SIP Trunk design and SBC vendor choices(basically CUBE vs Acme Packet). I would really appreciate if anyone with SIP Trunking/SBC expertise (Cisco/Acme Packet) can provide some input on the below queries: 1) *CUBE vs Acme Packet*: First of all Cisco has marked the CUBE SP Edition product line for EoL, exiting the SBC Service Provider segment, so leaving only SBC Enterprise as the option. Although at this stage we are looking for an enterprise grade SBC but it will be a plus if it has the potential to step up into a SP SBC in a multi-tenanted environment. I was comparing AP 3820 with the CUBE Ent ASR1k-x: CUBE provides no HA (though in some documents it says, came out from a meeting with the Cisco SME informing HA is not available), No transcoding (due to lack of DSP on ASR1K), No Multi-tenancy support with all of these features supported in a 3820 SBC Any feature better in CUBE that I may have overlooked? I am aware that CUBE configuration etc. can be easy compared to Acme Packet but apart from that any solid reason to choose CUBE over AP? 2) *HA vs Non-HA*: HA is obviously the preferred approach and looks like only possible with AP. Can anyone confirm the HA works as claimed by AP? Due to the costs involved in double the equipment – whats the common approach followed here HA or non-HA? 3) *Centralised Design*: We are planning on a centralised SIP solution (with SBCs at both the DCs), anything to be careful of? 4) *Transcoding*: CUBE ASR1K does not support transcoding (due to to lack of DSPs on this platform). Normally we would have an agreement with the provider on codecs, but still any scenarios when a SBC would need transcoding or on-board DSPs ? 5) *WAN link termination* – If we are to provision new WAN links for the this SIP service, what’s the preferred approach – terminating WAN links directly on the SBC or on the existing routers, does Acme Packet supports WAN link termination? 6) *Media flow around vs flow thru* – Any comments on which approach is better? I am preferring flow through at this stage. Any suggestions? 7) *Acme Packet Virtual SBC*: I was looking into AP virtual SBC although it has a limited scalability at this stage, but would like to hear any input if anyone is using this. Thanks in advance. Terry
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
