""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > At 08:57 PM 5/23/02, Steven A. Ridder wrote: > >What are the the philosophical reasons that would make it difficult? > > Phone networks haven't been very dynamic before and telephony people don't > adopt changes very quickly. And you might be putting PBX administrator > types out of work...
Isn't that what people said about the mainframe/SNA world in mid-90's? That was another network, which was a lot like the voice/PBX world (a hard to manage, expensive and cumbersome, proprietary system) that Cisco managed to get converged with IP. I thought a lot of people said they wouldn't mix well together, but who can imagine a time when the SNA and IP networks were seperate today? It's inevetable that the same thing is going to happen with voice. And if the PBX admin knows that he's still 20 years from retiring, then he better jump on the bandwagen and learn the new technology. CM still does same functions as a PBX that the admin is familiar with, just with a different box (or boxes) > > > I must > >be that youngester that dosen't understand ; ) > > Cool. That's what we need. > > >Honestly, I can't imagine it > >being that hard. > >It would be a lot like advertising static routes. Once > >you config the local dial-peer, you advertise it, and the other routers > >receive it, and enter it into their dial-peer routing table, along with the > >source address it came from. At that point, I guess overlapping dial peers > >would become the biggest problem. > > Sounds like normal routing! There are probably lots of issues we can't > think of off the top, but they certainly aren't unsolvable. And if we're > thinking this way, I'm sure others are too. > > > >Plus, with VoIP, Call Manager, and other new technologies the PBX is going > >the way of the dinosaur anyways. > > Well, Call Manager is an awful lot like a PBX though. It's just software. > At one point I was going to teach a class on Call Manager. It was so boring > (and the students were essentially glorified secretaries) that I couldn't > stay awake. It may have gotten better since then (a couple years ago) though. Intrestingly enough, some of the CM code has been ported to the routers for SRST, and there's IOS Telephony Feature comming out that will make a CM unnecessary in small offices. So the router is already becomming the PBX as well. AFAIK, CM is still the same as when it was bought from Selsius a few years ago, just now it runs on a Win2k server and there are more features. Still boring, but it's the only thing that's realy selling. The only exciting thing is that once you converge the voice and data network, you can truly integrate apps into the fabric of the network. Besides Unified Messaging, there are a ton of other neat little apps that make your life easier. Call me lazy, but I always wanted to look into an Exchange e-mail directory and be able to call that user by clicking on his phone number. With IP/Telephony I can now do it. Check out www.hotdispatch.com/cisco-ip-telephony. That is a site that just has custom apps for the CM, made by the independent developers, so everything is pretty innovative. It reminds me of the 80's and all the small PC developers and independent apps that flourshed (I remember scouring BBS's for any interesting thing that may have caught my attention) > > Priscilla > > >Seen Nortel's stock laterly! GO Cisco! > > > > > > > >-- > > > >RFC 1149 Compliant. > >Get in my head: > >http://sar.dynu.com > > > > > >""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in message > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > At 02:19 PM 5/23/02, Steven A. Ridder wrote: > > > >Does anyone at Cisco know if a dynamic routing-like protocol will be > >coming > > > >out for h.323 zones or dial-peers? It's seems to be a pain to > statically > > > >enter in dial-peers for all routers and h.323 zones. > > > > > > Interesting question! It sort of relates to that CCIE lab rat > conversation > > > we had that included a line something like "Do the PBX guys know VoIP?" > > > This is the other way around. > > > > > > With dial peers, you're doing the sort of nitty-gritty administrative > work > > > that PBX administrators have done for years. Whether some protocols will > >be > > > designed to make it easier and more dynamic or not, I don't know. It's a > > > good idea, but it might involve some philosophical paradigm shifts. Now > >I'm > > > sounding like an old-timer. ;-) Seriously it might take a "youngster" who > > > wouldn't even consider that the task is extremely difficult for both > > > technical and philosophical reasons. > > > > > > That's my 0.00000010 cents. > > > > > > Priscilla > > > > > > > > > >-- > > > >RFC 1149 Compliant > > > > > > > >Get in my head: > > > >http://sar.dynu.com > > > ________________________ > > > > > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > > > http://www.priscilla.com > ________________________ > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44923&t=44860 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
