Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
"Jason W. Parks" writes: > Thanks for the info. As we move forward, we'll be testing and making a > phone selections. No doubt we'll run into this. Are you saying if the > phone is stated to be a 10/100 phone, it still may not work at 10? I must admit it isn't something I have looked at particularly deeply. I hav experienced that Snom 3xx phones have not linked up at 10Mbps a few times and I have never seen them successfully achieve link at 10Mbps. This could be a firmware issue or a general issue with the quality of those 10Mbps networks. Or Snom simply does not allow their phones to connect to a 10Mbps network. In each case the network installations and switches were improved so 100Mbps worked without any problems. /Benny -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Hans Witvliet wrote: > Even on a 100Mbps network, if one of the machines on the same network is > doing a rsync-job (no saturation), I notice a drop in voip-quality. That's because you don't know how to properly configure a network. You could run 10m to saturation and still get good voice quality--if you did it right. -- Carlos Alvarez TelEvolve 602-889-3003 -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
Gotcha! That was my plan. I ran into that exact issue when I was randomly speed testing a couple of the lines. The computer under test immediately negotiated to 100Mb and ran just fine, but I know I'm asking for trouble to keep it that way. I will be forcing all ports down to 10. ...and thanks for the example. That's good information. On 2/13/12, Bryant Zimmerman wrote: > Jason > > A standard SIP VOIP phone will use less than 100k per voice call. For > example I have several bussiness customers that have a dedicated DSL line > and they do up to 6 lines very well on that 1.5x384 (we do g729 which is > 37k per call). If your networks drops can test solid at 10mb you should be > in good shape if they do not run solid at 100mb you should force the switch > port to negoitate to 10mb not 100mb. Make sure the POE switches you are > looking at allow you to force the port speed this may save you in the long > run. Also make sure that the POE switch can handle the load and run lengths > you are looking to put on it. > > Bryant > > > BrFrom: "Jason W. Parks" > Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:32 AM > To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" > > Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones > > Thanks for the info. As we move forward, we'll be testing and making a > phone selections. No doubt we'll run into this. Are you saying if the > phone is stated to be a 10/100 phone, it still may not work at 10? > > On 2/13/2012 1:32 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote: >> "Jason W. Parks" writes: >> >>> I can move my voice infrastructure to an IP-based one running 10Mbps, >>> utilize existing wiring infrastructure, with the only cost outlay >>> being low cost PoE managed switches (48 ports for about a grand), and >>> it ends up a lot cheaper than upgrading the data network to support >>> the phones. ...and I can still stay within standard. >> You can, but not all phones will link up at 10Mbps. >> >> >> /Benny >> >> -- >> _ >> -- 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 > > > -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
Jason A standard SIP VOIP phone will use less than 100k per voice call. For example I have several bussiness customers that have a dedicated DSL line and they do up to 6 lines very well on that 1.5x384 (we do g729 which is 37k per call). If your networks drops can test solid at 10mb you should be in good shape if they do not run solid at 100mb you should force the switch port to negoitate to 10mb not 100mb. Make sure the POE switches you are looking at allow you to force the port speed this may save you in the long run. Also make sure that the POE switch can handle the load and run lengths you are looking to put on it. Bryant BrFrom: "Jason W. Parks" Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:32 AM To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones Thanks for the info. As we move forward, we'll be testing and making a phone selections. No doubt we'll run into this. Are you saying if the phone is stated to be a 10/100 phone, it still may not work at 10? On 2/13/2012 1:32 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote: > "Jason W. Parks" writes: > >> I can move my voice infrastructure to an IP-based one running 10Mbps, >> utilize existing wiring infrastructure, with the only cost outlay >> being low cost PoE managed switches (48 ports for about a grand), and >> it ends up a lot cheaper than upgrading the data network to support >> the phones. ...and I can still stay within standard. > You can, but not all phones will link up at 10Mbps. > > > /Benny > > -- > _ > -- 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 -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
The existing infrastructure I'm speaking of is the existing voice infrastructure. It currently supports a digital PBX. No IP whatsoever, but the wiring is rated for 10BaseT. As we look to replace the digital PBX with VoIP, my options are to abandon that wiring and start using our data network, or upgrade our existing voice infrastructure to support VoIP. The numbers are showing It would be cost prohibitive to upgrade our existing data network to support VoIP. ...and I think you've just supported one of my reasons for continuing to keep voice and data networks separate. Since the voice network will be completely and physically separate from any non-voice data, and all devices on that network are phones, it just became a lot less complicated. ...and I'm only talking 10Mb between the phone and the switch. All switches would be interconnected either with 100 or 1000. Thanks for the response. Jason "Cheer up, the worst is yet to come." On 2/13/2012 2:48 AM, Hans Witvliet wrote: On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 09:32 +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote: "Jason W. Parks" writes: I can move my voice infrastructure to an IP-based one running 10Mbps, utilize existing wiring infrastructure, with the only cost outlay being low cost PoE managed switches (48 ports for about a grand), and it ends up a lot cheaper than upgrading the data network to support the phones. ...and I can still stay within standard. You can, but not all phones will link up at 10Mbps. /Benny -- _ Are you realy shure you want to do that? I mean _existing_ infra (with probably a number of other (non-voip) machines connected to it? Even on a 100Mbps network, if one of the machines on the same network is doing a rsync-job (no saturation), I notice a drop in voip-quality. Adding voip to existing infra might work, if your network is good enough, like Gb with enough unused bandwith and low latency. Or if you can tell complaining users, that it is a temporary solution. hw -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
Thanks for the info. As we move forward, we'll be testing and making a phone selections. No doubt we'll run into this. Are you saying if the phone is stated to be a 10/100 phone, it still may not work at 10? On 2/13/2012 1:32 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote: "Jason W. Parks" writes: I can move my voice infrastructure to an IP-based one running 10Mbps, utilize existing wiring infrastructure, with the only cost outlay being low cost PoE managed switches (48 ports for about a grand), and it ends up a lot cheaper than upgrading the data network to support the phones. ...and I can still stay within standard. You can, but not all phones will link up at 10Mbps. /Benny -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
I think that implementing QoS is a better way to handle voip on a 100 Mbps network, than to upgrade everything to 1 Gbps On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Hans Witvliet wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 09:32 +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote: >> "Jason W. Parks" writes: >> >> > I can move my voice infrastructure to an IP-based one running 10Mbps, >> > utilize existing wiring infrastructure, with the only cost outlay >> > being low cost PoE managed switches (48 ports for about a grand), and >> > it ends up a lot cheaper than upgrading the data network to support >> > the phones. ...and I can still stay within standard. >> >> You can, but not all phones will link up at 10Mbps. >> >> >> /Benny >> >> -- >> _ > Are you realy shure you want to do that? > I mean _existing_ infra (with probably a number of other (non-voip) > machines connected to it? > > Even on a 100Mbps network, if one of the machines on the same network is > doing a rsync-job (no saturation), I notice a drop in voip-quality. > > Adding voip to existing infra might work, if your network is good > enough, like Gb with enough unused bandwith and low latency. Or if you > can tell complaining users, that it is a temporary solution. > > hw > > > -- > _ > -- 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 -- Roberto Piola, Ph.D. Senior Network Engineer Outsourcing Infrastructure VISIANT OUTSOURCING strada del Drosso 128/6 - 10135 Torino T +39 011 3473520 - F +39 011 3473522 M +39 3356961505 roberto.pi...@visiant.it www.visiantoutsourcing.it Questo messaggio è destinato alle sole persone indicate e può contenere informazioni riservate. Se avete ricevuto questo e-mail per errore siete pregati di comunicarlo immediatamente al mittente o di inviare un e-mail a: info.outsourc...@visiant.it. Ogni altro uso del messaggio è vietato. This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient please notify immediately the sender or email: info.outsourc...@visiant.it. All other use is prohibited. -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 09:32 +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote: > "Jason W. Parks" writes: > > > I can move my voice infrastructure to an IP-based one running 10Mbps, > > utilize existing wiring infrastructure, with the only cost outlay > > being low cost PoE managed switches (48 ports for about a grand), and > > it ends up a lot cheaper than upgrading the data network to support > > the phones. ...and I can still stay within standard. > > You can, but not all phones will link up at 10Mbps. > > > /Benny > > -- > _ Are you realy shure you want to do that? I mean _existing_ infra (with probably a number of other (non-voip) machines connected to it? Even on a 100Mbps network, if one of the machines on the same network is doing a rsync-job (no saturation), I notice a drop in voip-quality. Adding voip to existing infra might work, if your network is good enough, like Gb with enough unused bandwith and low latency. Or if you can tell complaining users, that it is a temporary solution. hw -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
"Jason W. Parks" writes: > I can move my voice infrastructure to an IP-based one running 10Mbps, > utilize existing wiring infrastructure, with the only cost outlay > being low cost PoE managed switches (48 ports for about a grand), and > it ends up a lot cheaper than upgrading the data network to support > the phones. ...and I can still stay within standard. You can, but not all phones will link up at 10Mbps. /Benny -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
2012/2/10, Jason W. Parks : > I'm in a similar situation. However, most of my buildings were re-wired > around 1994 to provide Cat5 or 5E to the desktop for data, and 2-pair > Cat3 for voice, all in a star topology. I can move my voice > infrastructure to an IP-based one running 10Mbps, utilize existing > wiring infrastructure, with the only cost outlay being low cost PoE > managed switches (48 ports for about a grand), and it ends up a lot > cheaper than upgrading the data network to support the phones. ...and I > can still stay within standard. > > Is this an option for you Yes this is an option but the original question "why no low-end Gigabit phones on the market ?". Try to find a PC motherboard with 10/100 interface. Now, it's Gigabit for all, no matter if people need its speed or not. And both, IP phones and PC motherboard are 100$ products. What strikes me is that it's still not the case in 2012, for IP phones. I can live with that but I'm still a bit surprised by this remaining year after year. or are you still living with the remnants of > an old key system or something like that? > > "The journey of a thousand miles begins with a broken fan belt and a flat > tire." > > > On 2/8/2012 10:46 AM, Vieri wrote: >> Let me answer that, Carlos. A big hospital. >> >> These big infrastructures can be quite outdated and messy. Getting >> someone to cable old parts of the buildings can be very expensive. >> However, replacing just the backbone switches is something they can >> afford. And they don't need PoE, really. >> What kind of applications benefit from gigabit speed? Well, plenty, >> such as MDs having to view a whole bunch of x-ray images of several >> patients, as fast as possible. Believe me, doctors aren't patient and >> Gbps makes a big difference. >> >> So basically, that's your answer: these sites don't need PoE, just >> Gbps and can't afford cabling a huge old building. Now, they don't >> care for PoE on the hardphones either. >> >> So in these cases, I think it's clearly justifiable to have a >> low-budget Digium D40 or Grandstream GXP280 with a 2-NIC Gbps switch. >> Not a big deal anyway, because they can always add a mini 5 or 8-port >> gigiabit switch for around 20$ between the wall socket and the >> hardphone+PC, but that just adds another appliance to the doctor's >> office... >> >> >> --- On *Wed, 2/8/12, Carlos Alvarez //* wrote: >> >> >> From: Carlos Alvarez >> Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones >> To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" >> >> Date: Wednesday, February 8, 2012, 9:26 AM >> >> If the customer is so cheap that they won't properly build out the >> network, why would they have gigabit switches to the desktop which >> have a limited set of applications that actually benefit from it? >> >> Then there's PoE, which is expensive to start and very expensive >> with gigabit. So this mythical customer is too cheap to cable, >> but will buy a gigabit switch of dubious value, will they buy a >> PoE gigabit switch? If not, why not buy a value-priced PoE 100m >> switch which has a clear benefit instead of a low-end GB switch of >> dubious value? >> >> I just don't see the fit, and I'm guessing the vendors don't >> either. What is the exact network topology (brands/models) and >> applications that justify GB to the desktop, don't justify >> additional cabling, and how do you account for PoE in this >> environment? >> >> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Vieri > > wrote: >> >> >> --- On Wed, 2/8/12, Jason W. Parks > > wrote: >> >> > From everything I've researched to >> > date, my understanding is most >> > locations have chosen to double their port density and >> > continue to >> > service the phone and computer on separate ports than to >> > share a single >> > line for both computer and phone. Reason primarily mentioned >> > being >> > troubleshooting concerns. If this is the case, the second >> > port is not >> > required, and become nothing but another gimmick to sell to >> > you. >> > >> > Is this everyone else's experience as well? >> >> Well, at some locations, for tec
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
I'm in a similar situation. However, most of my buildings were re-wired
around 1994 to provide Cat5 or 5E to the desktop for data, and 2-pair
Cat3 for voice, all in a star topology. I can move my voice
infrastructure to an IP-based one running 10Mbps, utilize existing
wiring infrastructure, with the only cost outlay being low cost PoE
managed switches (48 ports for about a grand), and it ends up a lot
cheaper than upgrading the data network to support the phones. ...and I
can still stay within standard.
Is this an option for you or are you still living with the remnants of
an old key system or something like that?
"The journey of a thousand miles begins with a broken fan belt and a flat tire."
On 2/8/2012 10:46 AM, Vieri wrote:
Let me answer that, Carlos. A big hospital.
These big infrastructures can be quite outdated and messy. Getting
someone to cable old parts of the buildings can be very expensive.
However, replacing just the backbone switches is something they can
afford. And they don't need PoE, really.
What kind of applications benefit from gigabit speed? Well, plenty,
such as MDs having to view a whole bunch of x-ray images of several
patients, as fast as possible. Believe me, doctors aren't patient and
Gbps makes a big difference.
So basically, that's your answer: these sites don't need PoE, just
Gbps and can't afford cabling a huge old building. Now, they don't
care for PoE on the hardphones either.
So in these cases, I think it's clearly justifiable to have a
low-budget Digium D40 or Grandstream GXP280 with a 2-NIC Gbps switch.
Not a big deal anyway, because they can always add a mini 5 or 8-port
gigiabit switch for around 20$ between the wall socket and the
hardphone+PC, but that just adds another appliance to the doctor's
office...
--- On *Wed, 2/8/12, Carlos Alvarez //* wrote:
From: Carlos Alvarez
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion"
Date: Wednesday, February 8, 2012, 9:26 AM
If the customer is so cheap that they won't properly build out the
network, why would they have gigabit switches to the desktop which
have a limited set of applications that actually benefit from it?
Then there's PoE, which is expensive to start and very expensive
with gigabit. So this mythical customer is too cheap to cable,
but will buy a gigabit switch of dubious value, will they buy a
PoE gigabit switch? If not, why not buy a value-priced PoE 100m
switch which has a clear benefit instead of a low-end GB switch of
dubious value?
I just don't see the fit, and I'm guessing the vendors don't
either. What is the exact network topology (brands/models) and
applications that justify GB to the desktop, don't justify
additional cabling, and how do you account for PoE in this
environment?
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Vieri > wrote:
--- On Wed, 2/8/12, Jason W. Parks > wrote:
> From everything I've researched to
> date, my understanding is most
> locations have chosen to double their port density and
> continue to
> service the phone and computer on separate ports than to
> share a single
> line for both computer and phone. Reason primarily mentioned
> being
> troubleshooting concerns. If this is the case, the second
> port is not
> required, and become nothing but another gimmick to sell to
> you.
>
> Is this everyone else's experience as well?
Well, at some locations, for technical and mostly political
reasons, doubling port density so that the computer connects
to a separate port is too costly, way over what a 60$
hardphone can cost (eg. Grandstream GXP285). I'd be glad to
pay just "a tad more" for hundreds of "basic" hardphones, just
as long as they can do gigabit.
Vieri
--
_
-- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
2012/2/8, Carlos Alvarez : > If the customer is so cheap that they won't properly build out the network, > why would they have gigabit switches to the desktop which have a limited > set of applications that actually benefit from it? > > Then there's PoE, which is expensive to start and very expensive with > gigabit. So this mythical customer is too cheap to cable, but will buy a > gigabit switch of dubious value, will they buy a PoE gigabit switch? If > not, why not buy a value-priced PoE 100m switch which has a clear benefit > instead of a low-end GB switch of dubious value? > > I just don't see the fit, and I'm guessing the vendors don't either. I disagree here : what if you're changing your telephony system this year and you'll upgrade your network next year ? Would you buy high end phones for everybody, just for that ? Needing Gigabit to the desktop doesn't imply you a SIP phone with a large or color screen. I also visited locations like University campus in which a Cat5 is a scarce resource. Having low end Gigabit phones allow a more modular procurement, if I may call it this way, and is a useful mean to protect investments. What > is the exact network topology (brands/models) and applications that justify > GB to the desktop, don't justify additional cabling, and how do you account > for PoE in this environment? > > On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Vieri wrote: > >> >> --- On Wed, 2/8/12, Jason W. Parks wrote: >> >> > From everything I've researched to >> > date, my understanding is most >> > locations have chosen to double their port density and >> > continue to >> > service the phone and computer on separate ports than to >> > share a single >> > line for both computer and phone. Reason primarily mentioned >> > being >> > troubleshooting concerns. If this is the case, the second >> > port is not >> > required, and become nothing but another gimmick to sell to >> > you. >> > >> > Is this everyone else's experience as well? >> >> Well, at some locations, for technical and mostly political reasons, >> doubling port density so that the computer connects to a separate port is >> too costly, way over what a 60$ hardphone can cost (eg. Grandstream >> GXP285). I'd be glad to pay just "a tad more" for hundreds of "basic" >> hardphones, just as long as they can do gigabit. >> >> Vieri >> >> -- >> _ >> -- 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 >> > > > > -- > Carlos Alvarez > TelEvolve > 602-889-3003 > -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
Let me answer that, Carlos. A big hospital. These big infrastructures can be quite outdated and messy. Getting someone to cable old parts of the buildings can be very expensive. However, replacing just the backbone switches is something they can afford. And they don't need PoE, really. What kind of applications benefit from gigabit speed? Well, plenty, such as MDs having to view a whole bunch of x-ray images of several patients, as fast as possible. Believe me, doctors aren't patient and Gbps makes a big difference. So basically, that's your answer: these sites don't need PoE, just Gbps and can't afford cabling a huge old building. Now, they don't care for PoE on the hardphones either. So in these cases, I think it's clearly justifiable to have a low-budget Digium D40 or Grandstream GXP280 with a 2-NIC Gbps switch. Not a big deal anyway, because they can always add a mini 5 or 8-port gigiabit switch for around 20$ between the wall socket and the hardphone+PC, but that just adds another appliance to the doctor's office... --- On Wed, 2/8/12, Carlos Alvarez wrote: From: Carlos Alvarez Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" Date: Wednesday, February 8, 2012, 9:26 AM If the customer is so cheap that they won't properly build out the network, why would they have gigabit switches to the desktop which have a limited set of applications that actually benefit from it? Then there's PoE, which is expensive to start and very expensive with gigabit. So this mythical customer is too cheap to cable, but will buy a gigabit switch of dubious value, will they buy a PoE gigabit switch? If not, why not buy a value-priced PoE 100m switch which has a clear benefit instead of a low-end GB switch of dubious value? I just don't see the fit, and I'm guessing the vendors don't either. What is the exact network topology (brands/models) and applications that justify GB to the desktop, don't justify additional cabling, and how do you account for PoE in this environment? On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Vieri wrote: --- On Wed, 2/8/12, Jason W. Parks wrote: > From everything I've researched to > date, my understanding is most > locations have chosen to double their port density and > continue to > service the phone and computer on separate ports than to > share a single > line for both computer and phone. Reason primarily mentioned > being > troubleshooting concerns. If this is the case, the second > port is not > required, and become nothing but another gimmick to sell to > you. > > Is this everyone else's experience as well? Well, at some locations, for technical and mostly political reasons, doubling port density so that the computer connects to a separate port is too costly, way over what a 60$ hardphone can cost (eg. Grandstream GXP285). I'd be glad to pay just "a tad more" for hundreds of "basic" hardphones, just as long as they can do gigabit. Vieri-- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Patrick Lists < asterisk-l...@puzzled.xs4all.nl> wrote: > >> Is this everyone else's experience as well? >> > > No the opposite. I have never heard of troubleshooting problems when using > the switch on the phone. Maybe cheap crappy phones give you problems but I > have never seen it with Polycom, Aastra, Snom or Cisco. > Also you would need to have a second LAN port at each desk. I have come > across only 2 places where that was the case and that's only because they > had downsized freeing up LAN ports formerly belonging to the other desks in > the room. > > We primarily serve businesses with 5-60 phones. We've found an even mix of: Have two drops already (sometimes one is "phone" but is Cat 5 or better) Have a single but willing/happy to add a second Want to use a single with the phone's switch I can only recall one customer who truly needed to have GB to the desktop. This company is running huge construction plan drawings all over the network and there's a clear measurable improvement with GB. They ran additional drops for the phones. A few others said they have GB to the desktop, so we told them to nail down a few connections to 100m and then survey the users. None of them could tell the difference, as they were just using everyday office applications where this doesn't matter. -- Carlos Alvarez TelEvolve 602-889-3003 -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
On 08-02-12 14:37, Jason W. Parks wrote: From everything I've researched to date, my understanding is most locations have chosen to double their port density and continue to service the phone and computer on separate ports than to share a single line for both computer and phone. Reason primarily mentioned being troubleshooting concerns. If this is the case, the second port is not required, and become nothing but another gimmick to sell to you. Is this everyone else's experience as well? No the opposite. I have never heard of troubleshooting problems when using the switch on the phone. Maybe cheap crappy phones give you problems but I have never seen it with Polycom, Aastra, Snom or Cisco. Also you would need to have a second LAN port at each desk. I have come across only 2 places where that was the case and that's only because they had downsized freeing up LAN ports formerly belonging to the other desks in the room. Regards, Patrick -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
If the customer is so cheap that they won't properly build out the network, why would they have gigabit switches to the desktop which have a limited set of applications that actually benefit from it? Then there's PoE, which is expensive to start and very expensive with gigabit. So this mythical customer is too cheap to cable, but will buy a gigabit switch of dubious value, will they buy a PoE gigabit switch? If not, why not buy a value-priced PoE 100m switch which has a clear benefit instead of a low-end GB switch of dubious value? I just don't see the fit, and I'm guessing the vendors don't either. What is the exact network topology (brands/models) and applications that justify GB to the desktop, don't justify additional cabling, and how do you account for PoE in this environment? On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Vieri wrote: > > --- On Wed, 2/8/12, Jason W. Parks wrote: > > > From everything I've researched to > > date, my understanding is most > > locations have chosen to double their port density and > > continue to > > service the phone and computer on separate ports than to > > share a single > > line for both computer and phone. Reason primarily mentioned > > being > > troubleshooting concerns. If this is the case, the second > > port is not > > required, and become nothing but another gimmick to sell to > > you. > > > > Is this everyone else's experience as well? > > Well, at some locations, for technical and mostly political reasons, > doubling port density so that the computer connects to a separate port is > too costly, way over what a 60$ hardphone can cost (eg. Grandstream > GXP285). I'd be glad to pay just "a tad more" for hundreds of "basic" > hardphones, just as long as they can do gigabit. > > Vieri > > -- > _ > -- 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 > -- Carlos Alvarez TelEvolve 602-889-3003 -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
--- On Wed, 2/8/12, Jason W. Parks wrote: > From everything I've researched to > date, my understanding is most > locations have chosen to double their port density and > continue to > service the phone and computer on separate ports than to > share a single > line for both computer and phone. Reason primarily mentioned > being > troubleshooting concerns. If this is the case, the second > port is not > required, and become nothing but another gimmick to sell to > you. > > Is this everyone else's experience as well? Well, at some locations, for technical and mostly political reasons, doubling port density so that the computer connects to a separate port is too costly, way over what a 60$ hardphone can cost (eg. Grandstream GXP285). I'd be glad to pay just "a tad more" for hundreds of "basic" hardphones, just as long as they can do gigabit. Vieri -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
From everything I've researched to date, my understanding is most locations have chosen to double their port density and continue to service the phone and computer on separate ports than to share a single line for both computer and phone. Reason primarily mentioned being troubleshooting concerns. If this is the case, the second port is not required, and become nothing but another gimmick to sell to you. Is this everyone else's experience as well? Thanks, Jason "Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you wanted." On 2/8/2012 2:01 AM, Vieri wrote: I'm trying to understand why vendors keep making 100Mbps integrated 1-port switches in their hardware SIP phones. Even the recently-announced D40 and D50 Digium phones are limited to 100Mbps. Only the more expensive models (like the D70) can run at 1000Mbps. However, you can't expect a firm with hundreds of extensions to buy the most expensive model... And gigabit speed is important when "sharing" the network with a PC (because PC apps may "require" gigabit speed). The day will come when medium or low-budget hardphones will have integrated gigabit switches. But is it THAT expensive to put in 2 gigabit ports in a hardphone nowadays? Or is it just marketing? How much would it take for Digium to sell their D40 phones with gigabit ports? Vieri -- _ -- 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
Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
2012/2/8, Vieri : > I'm trying to understand why vendors keep making 100Mbps integrated 1-port > switches in their hardware SIP phones. Even the recently-announced D40 and > D50 Digium phones are limited to 100Mbps. Only the more expensive models > (like the D70) can run at 1000Mbps. > However, you can't expect a firm with hundreds of extensions to buy the most > expensive model... > And gigabit speed is important when "sharing" the network with a PC (because > PC apps may "require" gigabit speed). > > The day will come when medium or low-budget hardphones will have integrated > gigabit switches. But is it THAT expensive to put in 2 gigabit ports in a > hardphone nowadays? Or is it just marketing? I fully agree with your remarks and questions. It seems to me that low-end phones are still designed today to compete on price with analog phones as if a large share of decision makers wouldn't pay a premium to benefit from VoIP features. If people markets these low-end phones this way, I'm sure they must have a reason for that but that doesn't change the fact that I'm still a bit surprised this remains the norm these days. > > How much would it take for Digium to sell their D40 phones with gigabit > ports? > > Vieri > > > -- > _ > -- 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
[asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
I'm trying to understand why vendors keep making 100Mbps integrated 1-port switches in their hardware SIP phones. Even the recently-announced D40 and D50 Digium phones are limited to 100Mbps. Only the more expensive models (like the D70) can run at 1000Mbps. However, you can't expect a firm with hundreds of extensions to buy the most expensive model... And gigabit speed is important when "sharing" the network with a PC (because PC apps may "require" gigabit speed). The day will come when medium or low-budget hardphones will have integrated gigabit switches. But is it THAT expensive to put in 2 gigabit ports in a hardphone nowadays? Or is it just marketing? How much would it take for Digium to sell their D40 phones with gigabit ports? Vieri -- _ -- 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
