Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

We opted for Adtran TA5000's with 48 port VDSL2 vectoring combo cards,
going by expected losses we expect to have more than 50mbps d/l at all
cabins, we are going to lock them at 50 anyway sincve we reply on RF
to get data in first place. and use a central splitter to separate
vdsl and POTS at each cabin, must like everybody did adsl, apparently
this is largely how they do it in Europe vdsl and pots on same line
(just on a much bigger scale than us). This gives them their high
speed data and reliable POTS - since if the residential areas loses
power, not relying on end user SIP, their voice will still work when
their modems (and area) is without power.

We were advised that having an inline microfilter - like adsl, would
be more problematic at vdsl since it is essentially a bridge tap -
something we all know is bad, it would be much greater issue, and the
central splitter unit we looking at using allegedly avoids this
problem.

The cost of the cards (and chassis) would be not justified for small
operations, but at our numbers its actually a cost saving over the
dual devices path, as well as the metallic line testing ability.

Thanks to all for advice.

On 5/12/20, Michael Thomas  wrote:
>
> On 5/11/20 1:31 PM, Mark Delany wrote:
>>> We need to keep battery backup requirements, and expand them to all last
>>> mile IP bits. The need to call 911 has not gone away.
>> For sure. I was merely observing that the conversion of POTS to VOIP
>> in Australia didn't create a nation-wide disaster as the
>> pearl-clutchers once predicted.
>>
>> In fact, if anything, the same folk who complained about the so-called
>> largesse of a nationwide IP last-mile are strangely silent now that
>> WFH is de rigueur.
>>
>> To your point, the original plan was 90+% passive optical back to
>> major exchanges so the infrastructure was largely invulnerable to
>> wide-scale power shutdowns/failures. All a residence has to do is feed
>> a 7W NTD to stay connected.
>
> Is this expecting ftth? Obviously things like DSLAM's and CMTS's require
> power. But all of this doesn't perfectly emulate the POTS requirements
> since it is my responsibility to feed power to the CPE my wifi routers,
> etc. What we saw last fall is that going long on gas/propane power
> generator companies is a pretty good bet and works fine in my neck of
> woods (in the boonies and the gold country) , but I don't see how that
> scales when you turn off the power to, oh say, Oakland or San Jose (or
> at least parts of them), which they did and will keep doing for the
> foreseeable future.
>
> Mike
>
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Michael Thomas]

On 5/11/20 1:31 PM, Mark Delany wrote:

We need to keep battery backup requirements, and expand them to all last
mile IP bits. The need to call 911 has not gone away.

For sure. I was merely observing that the conversion of POTS to VOIP
in Australia didn't create a nation-wide disaster as the
pearl-clutchers once predicted.

In fact, if anything, the same folk who complained about the so-called
largesse of a nationwide IP last-mile are strangely silent now that
WFH is de rigueur.

To your point, the original plan was 90+% passive optical back to
major exchanges so the infrastructure was largely invulnerable to
wide-scale power shutdowns/failures. All a residence has to do is feed
a 7W NTD to stay connected.


Is this expecting ftth? Obviously things like DSLAM's and CMTS's require 
power. But all of this doesn't perfectly emulate the POTS requirements 
since it is my responsibility to feed power to the CPE my wifi routers, 
etc. What we saw last fall is that going long on gas/propane power 
generator companies is a pretty good bet and works fine in my neck of 
woods (in the boonies and the gold country) , but I don't see how that 
scales when you turn off the power to, oh say, Oakland or San Jose (or 
at least parts of them), which they did and will keep doing for the 
foreseeable future.


Mike

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mark Delany]

> We need to keep battery backup requirements, and expand them to all last
> mile IP bits. The need to call 911 has not gone away.

For sure. I was merely observing that the conversion of POTS to VOIP
in Australia didn't create a nation-wide disaster as the
pearl-clutchers once predicted.

In fact, if anything, the same folk who complained about the so-called
largesse of a nationwide IP last-mile are strangely silent now that
WFH is de rigueur.

To your point, the original plan was 90+% passive optical back to
major exchanges so the infrastructure was largely invulnerable to
wide-scale power shutdowns/failures. All a residence has to do is feed
a 7W NTD to stay connected.


Mark.

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Michael Thomas]

On 5/10/20 6:24 PM, Mark Delany wrote:

wasnt there a hige shit stom in australia for their new national
broadband network making internet ptrimary and phone secondary, a lot
of aussies on forums I frequent bitch about its reliability, where
even their aged copper services worked fine, not to mention prolonged
outages due to storms and the bushfires they had recently,  lets hope
the world learns from australias mistakes and not go down that path.

There are still a few complaints every now and again but fixed line
numbers are continuing to drop off a cliff and those residential
services which remain have almost all been converted to VOIP via home
gateway with an FXS port.

Mobile/Cell is where most people ended up. Especially since you can
get unlimited calls/txt with some data for about ten bucks a month.

It also helps that a number of the mobile providers include
wifi-calling so mobile is a viable alternative even in weak cell
coverage areas if you have internet.

Yes, everyone knows about the reliability/power-failure arguments but
in the latest set of bushfires whole exchanges, backhaul services and
power distribution cables were destroyed so 8 hours of battery backed
up POTS in a local exchange didn't help much.



California exposed one big weakness last year though: purposeful 
shutdowns of the grid. These lasted on average about 3 days which is 
probably longer than any battery backup your home voip solution can stay 
up with. The other gaping problem is that even if I have a generator at 
home (which I do because... PG), there is no guarantee that my IP bits 
will land on something that has power. Cable and Cellular were 
apparently especially useless. I pleasantly found out that my POTS/DSL 
provider kept the lights on during the shutdown. Lots of people were in 
for a rude awakening, and since this is destined to be our new normal 
there are going to be a lot of unhappy campers every fall.


We need to keep battery backup requirements, and expand them to all last 
mile IP bits. The need to call 911 has not gone away.


Mike

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mark Delany]

> wasnt there a hige shit stom in australia for their new national
> broadband network making internet ptrimary and phone secondary, a lot
> of aussies on forums I frequent bitch about its reliability, where
> even their aged copper services worked fine, not to mention prolonged
> outages due to storms and the bushfires they had recently,  lets hope
> the world learns from australias mistakes and not go down that path.

There are still a few complaints every now and again but fixed line
numbers are continuing to drop off a cliff and those residential
services which remain have almost all been converted to VOIP via home
gateway with an FXS port.

Mobile/Cell is where most people ended up. Especially since you can
get unlimited calls/txt with some data for about ten bucks a month.

It also helps that a number of the mobile providers include
wifi-calling so mobile is a viable alternative even in weak cell
coverage areas if you have internet.

Yes, everyone knows about the reliability/power-failure arguments but
in the latest set of bushfires whole exchanges, backhaul services and
power distribution cables were destroyed so 8 hours of battery backed
up POTS in a local exchange didn't help much.


Mark.

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Colton Conor]

"Integrated metallic testing on the combo cards helps reduce truck rolls" I
can't stress this feature enough. Being mainly a data only CLEC, we wanted
to buy the cheaper, non-combo, data only DSL cards. However, Adtran, Calix,
Zhone, and Nokia confirmed that without the SIP to FXS combo function, you
loose the  Integrated metallic testing" This means you can't test loop
length (without a dsl modem trained on the other end), can't test if you
have a cross, foreign voltage, etc. Yes, this can be done with a field
tester, but the cost of sending a tech out to do that is much more of an
expense.

DSL only data ports were around $30 a port, and combo were like $50 a port
from what I remember.



On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 8:08 PM Nick Edwards 
wrote:

> On 5/11/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:
> > On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 4:16 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:
> >
> >> If POTS last mile is available, why complicate it with VoIP?
> >>
> >>
> > Because it is cheaper and easier? It is a lot of equipment there simply
> > does not need to be there. If you have DSL you have CPE equipment and
> that
> > CPE equipment can have FXP out for very little extra. You also save
> having
> > filters to separate DSL and voice.
> >
>
> Not really cheaper, modems with VoIP tend to be a bit more pricey so
> that 50 odd or CPE now becomes 80-100, doubling our per port cost
>
> and what is an FXP?   I think you mean FXS port.
>
>
> > In any case, even the ILEC here is dropping analog and delivering phone
> > services via VoIP and FXP out on the CPE. I believe because the
>
> wasnt there a hige shit stom in australia for their new national
> broadband network making internet ptrimary and phone secondary, a lot
> of aussies on forums I frequent bitch about its reliability, where
> even their aged copper services worked fine, not to mention prolonged
> outages due to storms and the bushfires they had recently,  lets hope
> the world learns from australias mistakes and not go down that path.
>
> >
> >
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

On 5/11/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:
> On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 4:16 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> If POTS last mile is available, why complicate it with VoIP?
>>
>>
> Because it is cheaper and easier? It is a lot of equipment there simply
> does not need to be there. If you have DSL you have CPE equipment and that
> CPE equipment can have FXP out for very little extra. You also save having
> filters to separate DSL and voice.
>

Not really cheaper, modems with VoIP tend to be a bit more pricey so
that 50 odd or CPE now becomes 80-100, doubling our per port cost

and what is an FXP?   I think you mean FXS port.


> In any case, even the ILEC here is dropping analog and delivering phone
> services via VoIP and FXP out on the CPE. I believe because the

wasnt there a hige shit stom in australia for their new national
broadband network making internet ptrimary and phone secondary, a lot
of aussies on forums I frequent bitch about its reliability, where
even their aged copper services worked fine, not to mention prolonged
outages due to storms and the bushfires they had recently,  lets hope
the world learns from australias mistakes and not go down that path.

>
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Michael Thomas]

On 5/10/20 5:56 PM, Nick Edwards wrote:

yes, POTS is the critical bit, the internet/data is an extra without
guarantee, ie it is not a critical component, voice is.



Voice may be a critical component regulationwise, especially with CO 
based battery backup. But in the rest of life IP bits are way more 
important. I can get a generator to run my CPE and router, but if the 
provider can't be bothered to power the first hop, then i'm pretty well 
screwed. In California during PG's massive power outages you couldn't 
get E911 even if you had power to your CPE in way too many cases. This 
is was a huge fail.


Mike



On 5/10/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:

Hi Nick

Have you considered using CPE DSL routers with VoIP and FXP analog out?
Decentralized. That's what everyone are doing here. Might be free depending
on where you get the CPEs.

Or simply getting VoIP handsets. Lots of cheap DECT bases with VoIP.

Regards

Baldur


søn. 10. maj 2020 14.51 skrev Nick Edwards :


On 5/8/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:14 AM Masataka Ohta <
mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:


Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.



We are assuming the copper plant is already there otherwise I will
respectfully disagree.

However the economic is not as simple as you might think. Lets do some
calculations.

Assume we can build the fiber plant for 1 million USD (*). This fiber
can
be depreciated over 25 years. That means we only take USD 40,000/year
of
the company profit.

The copper plant is already there but the DSLAM is missing. Assume USD

100

per port plus USD 100 per DSL CPE. This equipment can only be
depreciated
over 5 years. With 1700 ports this gives USD 68,000/year of the company
profit.


a 48 port dslam is 2200 (still awaiting cots  on line cards for above
mentioned chassis) so its about 45 per port, CPE is about 50 a device
in bulk (inc 4 gb ports, wifi)

The copper exists, there is no ripping it out

Due to location RF links are used for data, so no need to give each
cabin "future proof" since unless a carrier will run fibre to us for
100's miles at their cost - it just aint happenin,  the cost is
extremely prohibitive.


Not claiming these number are anything but fantasy as I know nothing

about

the layout of the project. Just illustrating that sometimes more money

now

does not necessary means less profit for a company.

(*) yes 1700 installs could be done for that in optimum circumstances.
It
could also be much more expensive, all depending.

Regards,

Baldur

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

indeed, otherwise thats making the data the critical compnent and
voice an add on extra which is not whats going no here :)

On 5/11/20, Mike Hammett  wrote:
> If POTS last mile is available, why complicate it with VoIP?
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Baldur Norddahl" 
> To: "Nick Edwards" , nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2020 8:23:36 AM
> Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways
>
>
> Hi Nick
>
>
> Have you considered using CPE DSL routers with VoIP and FXP analog out?
> Decentralized. That's what everyone are doing here. Might be free depending
> on where you get the CPEs.
>
>
> Or simply getting VoIP handsets. Lots of cheap DECT bases with VoIP.
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Baldur
>
>
>
>
> søn. 10. maj 2020 14.51 skrev Nick Edwards < nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com >:
>
>
> On 5/8/20, Baldur Norddahl < baldur.nordd...@gmail.com > wrote:
>> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:14 AM Masataka Ohta <
>> mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.
>>>
>>>
>> We are assuming the copper plant is already there otherwise I will
>> respectfully disagree.
>>
>> However the economic is not as simple as you might think. Lets do some
>> calculations.
>>
>> Assume we can build the fiber plant for 1 million USD (*). This fiber can
>>
>> be depreciated over 25 years. That means we only take USD 40,000/year of
>> the company profit.
>>
>> The copper plant is already there but the DSLAM is missing. Assume USD 100
>>
>> per port plus USD 100 per DSL CPE. This equipment can only be depreciated
>>
>> over 5 years. With 1700 ports this gives USD 68,000/year of the company
>> profit.
>>
>
> a 48 port dslam is 2200 (still awaiting cots on line cards for above
> mentioned chassis) so its about 45 per port, CPE is about 50 a device
> in bulk (inc 4 gb ports, wifi)
>
> The copper exists, there is no ripping it out
>
> Due to location RF links are used for data, so no need to give each
> cabin "future proof" since unless a carrier will run fibre to us for
> 100's miles at their cost - it just aint happenin, the cost is
> extremely prohibitive.
>
>> Not claiming these number are anything but fantasy as I know nothing about
>>
>> the layout of the project. Just illustrating that sometimes more money now
>>
>> does not necessary means less profit for a company.
>>
>> (*) yes 1700 installs could be done for that in optimum circumstances. It
>>
>> could also be much more expensive, all depending.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Baldur
>>
>
>
>
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

yes, POTS is the critical bit, the internet/data is an extra without
guarantee, ie it is not a critical component, voice is.

On 5/10/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:
> Hi Nick
>
> Have you considered using CPE DSL routers with VoIP and FXP analog out?
> Decentralized. That's what everyone are doing here. Might be free depending
> on where you get the CPEs.
>
> Or simply getting VoIP handsets. Lots of cheap DECT bases with VoIP.
>
> Regards
>
> Baldur
>
>
> søn. 10. maj 2020 14.51 skrev Nick Edwards :
>
>> On 5/8/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:14 AM Masataka Ohta <
>> > mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.
>> >>
>> >>
>> > We are assuming the copper plant is already there otherwise I will
>> > respectfully disagree.
>> >
>> > However the economic is not as simple as you might think. Lets do some
>> > calculations.
>> >
>> > Assume we can build the fiber plant for 1 million USD (*). This fiber
>> > can
>> > be depreciated over 25 years. That means we only take USD 40,000/year
>> > of
>> > the company profit.
>> >
>> > The copper plant is already there but the DSLAM is missing. Assume USD
>> 100
>> > per port plus USD 100 per DSL CPE. This equipment can only be
>> > depreciated
>> > over 5 years. With 1700 ports this gives USD 68,000/year of the company
>> > profit.
>> >
>>
>> a 48 port dslam is 2200 (still awaiting cots  on line cards for above
>> mentioned chassis) so its about 45 per port, CPE is about 50 a device
>> in bulk (inc 4 gb ports, wifi)
>>
>> The copper exists, there is no ripping it out
>>
>> Due to location RF links are used for data, so no need to give each
>> cabin "future proof" since unless a carrier will run fibre to us for
>> 100's miles at their cost - it just aint happenin,  the cost is
>> extremely prohibitive.
>>
>> > Not claiming these number are anything but fantasy as I know nothing
>> about
>> > the layout of the project. Just illustrating that sometimes more money
>> now
>> > does not necessary means less profit for a company.
>> >
>> > (*) yes 1700 installs could be done for that in optimum circumstances.
>> > It
>> > could also be much more expensive, all depending.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Baldur
>> >
>>
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mike Hammett]

The OP runs their own plant, so they don't need to worry about what some other 
entity will charge them for things. Put in combo cards and be done with it. 







- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Baldur Norddahl"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2020 5:57:59 PM 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 



Here we have DSL in cabinets so we can have short loop lengths and DSLAMS that 
control the entire bundle, to enable vectoring, v35b etc. Since this scheme 
does not work if there are multiple DSLAMS on a bundle, only the ILEC runs the 
DSLAMS now. I don't know if they just can't (Nokia) or if the power 
requirements are infeasible, but they are NOT doing POTS from the cabinets with 
DSLAMS. The cabinets have splitters and the POTS is routed back to the CO where 
you will have old equipment doing POTS probably dating 30 years or more. 


Hence if we want to order a DSL we only pay for the work done at the DSLAM 
cabinet and we only pay to rent a port in that DSLAM. If we were to order a 
POTS on top of that, we have to pay for them to connect the customer to the 
splitter and route him to the CO and then for him to be connected to equipment 
there too. This is clearly more work than just connecting him to the DSLAM and 
so it is not free. And then we also have to pay to rent a port on whatever 
equipment they have at CO. 


The FXP solution skips all that and uses a tiny bit of data with QoS and the 
voice quality is fantastic. For fiber there is of course no other way, so why 
not just do it the same way for all customers? Why pay to rent ports on the CO 
installed equipment? 


Well even the ILEC figured that out and started to do it that way. Probably 
because even for them it is not free to keep running the old equipment at the 
CO. That stuff uses power and I heard they also have to pay license fees. 



Also guessing that the reason so many DSL routers have FXP probably means 
someone are actually using this stuff. 


At 1700 scale it does not really matter how many there are. These things are 
going to download the centrally managed config. 


The OP is going to buy extra equipment to handle voice. At least that is my 
understanding. My question to him was just a humble suggestion that he could do 
away with that and just use the for free FXP ports. We have a whole country 
here doing that, so trust me it works at scale. 


Regards, 


Baldur 




On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 12:18 AM Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




>From someone that runs a DSL plant with CO-derived dial tone (and 
>ATAs\gateways where appropriate), no VoIP is not cheaper and easier at the 
>particular density we can infer from the OP. 


What's the "lot of equipment" that "simply does not need to be there"? I have a 
DSLAM line card that does DSL only or a DSLAM line card that does DSL and POTS. 
No extra equipment, unless you're counting board-level components. 


Manage voice configurations on 1700 modems\ATAs or voice configurations on 
1/48th of that in line cards? 


Yes, there are filters required, but I don't see that being a burden. 


Any ILEC (in the US anyway) dropping analog voice is attempting to go through 
some regulatory loophole, not because it's a technically superior or more cost 
effective solution. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 



From: "Baldur Norddahl" < baldur.nordd...@gmail.com > 
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2020 11:54:01 AM 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 







On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 4:16 PM Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




If POTS last mile is available, why complicate it with VoIP? 






Because it is cheaper and easier? It is a lot of equipment there simply does 
not need to be there. If you have DSL you have CPE equipment and that CPE 
equipment can have FXP out for very little extra. You also save having filters 
to separate DSL and voice. 


In any case, even the ILEC here is dropping analog and delivering phone 
services via VoIP and FXP out on the CPE. I believe because the technician only 
needs to go to the DSLAM to connect you. If you are also getting analog voice, 
he needs to go to the CO too because voice and DSLAM are no longer cohosted. 


Regards, 


Baldur 

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Baldur Norddahl]

Here we have DSL in cabinets so we can have short loop lengths and DSLAMS
that control the entire bundle, to enable vectoring, v35b etc. Since this
scheme does not work if there are multiple DSLAMS on a bundle, only the
ILEC runs the DSLAMS now. I don't know if they just can't (Nokia) or if the
power requirements are infeasible, but they are NOT doing POTS from the
cabinets with DSLAMS. The cabinets have splitters and the POTS is routed
back to the CO where you will have old equipment doing POTS probably dating
30 years or more.

Hence if we want to order a DSL we only pay for the work done at the DSLAM
cabinet and we only pay to rent a port in that DSLAM. If we were to order a
POTS on top of that, we have to pay for them to connect the customer to the
splitter and route him to the CO and then for him to be connected to
equipment there too. This is clearly more work than just connecting him to
the DSLAM and so it is not free. And then we also have to pay to rent a
port on whatever equipment they have at CO.

The FXP solution skips all that and uses a tiny bit of data with QoS and
the voice quality is fantastic. For fiber there is of course no other way,
so why not just do it the same way for all customers? Why pay to rent ports
on the CO installed equipment?

Well even the ILEC figured that out and started to do it that way. Probably
because even for them it is not free to keep running the old equipment at
the CO. That stuff uses power and I heard they also have to pay license
fees.

Also guessing that the reason so many DSL routers have FXP probably means
someone are actually using this stuff.

At 1700 scale it does not really matter how many there are. These things
are going to download the centrally managed config.

The OP is going to buy extra equipment to handle voice. At least that is my
understanding. My question to him was just a humble suggestion that he
could do away with that and just use the for free FXP ports. We have a
whole country here doing that, so trust me it works at scale.

Regards,

Baldur


On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 12:18 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> From someone that runs a DSL plant with CO-derived dial tone (and
> ATAs\gateways where appropriate), no VoIP is not cheaper and easier at the
> particular density we can infer from the OP.
>
> What's the "lot of equipment" that "simply does not need to be there"? I
> have a DSLAM line card that does DSL only or a DSLAM line card that does
> DSL and POTS. No extra equipment, unless you're counting board-level
> components.
>
> Manage voice configurations on 1700 modems\ATAs or voice configurations on
> 1/48th of that in line cards?
>
> Yes, there are filters required, but I don't see that being a burden.
>
> Any ILEC (in the US anyway) dropping analog voice is attempting to go
> through some regulatory loophole, not because it's a technically superior
> or more cost effective solution.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Baldur Norddahl" 
> *To: *nanog@nanog.org
> *Sent: *Sunday, May 10, 2020 11:54:01 AM
> *Subject: *Re: alternative to voip gateways
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 4:16 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> If POTS last mile is available, why complicate it with VoIP?
>>
>>
> Because it is cheaper and easier? It is a lot of equipment there simply
> does not need to be there. If you have DSL you have CPE equipment and that
> CPE equipment can have FXP out for very little extra. You also save having
> filters to separate DSL and voice.
>
> In any case, even the ILEC here is dropping analog and delivering phone
> services via VoIP and FXP out on the CPE. I believe because the
> technician only needs to go to the DSLAM to connect you. If you are also
> getting analog voice, he needs to go to the CO too because voice and DSLAM
> are no longer cohosted.
>
> Regards,
>
> Baldur
>
>
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mike Hammett]

>From someone that runs a DSL plant with CO-derived dial tone (and 
>ATAs\gateways where appropriate), no VoIP is not cheaper and easier at the 
>particular density we can infer from the OP. 


What's the "lot of equipment" that "simply does not need to be there"? I have a 
DSLAM line card that does DSL only or a DSLAM line card that does DSL and POTS. 
No extra equipment, unless you're counting board-level components. 


Manage voice configurations on 1700 modems\ATAs or voice configurations on 
1/48th of that in line cards? 


Yes, there are filters required, but I don't see that being a burden. 


Any ILEC (in the US anyway) dropping analog voice is attempting to go through 
some regulatory loophole, not because it's a technically superior or more cost 
effective solution. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Baldur Norddahl"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2020 11:54:01 AM 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 







On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 4:16 PM Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




If POTS last mile is available, why complicate it with VoIP? 






Because it is cheaper and easier? It is a lot of equipment there simply does 
not need to be there. If you have DSL you have CPE equipment and that CPE 
equipment can have FXP out for very little extra. You also save having filters 
to separate DSL and voice. 


In any case, even the ILEC here is dropping analog and delivering phone 
services via VoIP and FXP out on the CPE. I believe because the technician only 
needs to go to the DSLAM to connect you. If you are also getting analog voice, 
he needs to go to the CO too because voice and DSLAM are no longer cohosted. 


Regards, 


Baldur 

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Clayton Zekelman]

When we do DSL, we service everything out of 
ADSL2+ combo cards on Zhone MXK gear.


-Integrated metallic testing on the combo cards helps reduce truck rolls
-Having dialtone on the pair helps with 
identifying pairs in the field using ANAC

-Having dialtone on a pair provides sealing current
-Having dialtone on a pair stops other techs from 
"stealing" the pair for something else, because they think it isn't in use
-Derived voice (VoIP on CPE) makes the voice more 
subject to line impairments, etc.


At peak we had around 6000 leased CLEC copper pairs from the local ILEC.

Just notes from personal experience.

At 12:54 PM 10/05/2020, Baldur Norddahl wrote:


On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 4:16 PM Mike Hammett 
<na...@ics-il.net> wrote:

If POTS last mile is available, why complicate it with VoIP?


Because it is cheaper and easier? It is a lot of 
equipment there simply does not need to be 
there. If you have DSL you have CPE equipment 
and that CPE equipment can have FXP out for very 
little extra. You also save having filters to separate DSL and voice.


In any case, even the ILEC here is dropping 
analog and delivering phone services via VoIP 
and FXP out on the CPE. I believe because the 
technician only needs to go to the DSLAM to 
connect you. If you are also getting analog 
voice, he needs to go to the CO too because 
voice and DSLAM are no longer cohosted.


Regards,

Baldur


--

Clayton Zekelman
Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
Windsor, Ontario
N8W 1H4

tel. 519-985-8410
fax. 519-985-8409

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Baldur Norddahl]

On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 4:16 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> If POTS last mile is available, why complicate it with VoIP?
>
>
Because it is cheaper and easier? It is a lot of equipment there simply
does not need to be there. If you have DSL you have CPE equipment and that
CPE equipment can have FXP out for very little extra. You also save having
filters to separate DSL and voice.

In any case, even the ILEC here is dropping analog and delivering phone
services via VoIP and FXP out on the CPE. I believe because the
technician only needs to go to the DSLAM to connect you. If you are also
getting analog voice, he needs to go to the CO too because voice and DSLAM
are no longer cohosted.

Regards,

Baldur

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Michael Thomas]

On 5/10/20 6:23 AM, Baldur Norddahl wrote:

Hi Nick

Have you considered using CPE DSL routers with VoIP and FXP analog 
out? Decentralized. That's what everyone are doing here. Might be free 
depending on where you get the CPEs.


Or simply getting VoIP handsets. Lots of cheap DECT bases with VoIP.

The big issue here is battery backup. Being in Northern California these 
days, this isn't an academic problem anymore. One of the neat things I 
discovered about this new fangled dslam/pots termination is that they 
can get battery backup from the CO using legacy twisted pairs.


Mike

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mike Hammett]

If POTS last mile is available, why complicate it with VoIP? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Baldur Norddahl"  
To: "Nick Edwards" , nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2020 8:23:36 AM 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 


Hi Nick 


Have you considered using CPE DSL routers with VoIP and FXP analog out? 
Decentralized. That's what everyone are doing here. Might be free depending on 
where you get the CPEs. 


Or simply getting VoIP handsets. Lots of cheap DECT bases with VoIP. 


Regards 


Baldur 




søn. 10. maj 2020 14.51 skrev Nick Edwards < nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com >: 


On 5/8/20, Baldur Norddahl < baldur.nordd...@gmail.com > wrote: 
> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:14 AM Masataka Ohta < 
> mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp > wrote: 
> 
>> 
>> Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL. 
>> 
>> 
> We are assuming the copper plant is already there otherwise I will 
> respectfully disagree. 
> 
> However the economic is not as simple as you might think. Lets do some 
> calculations. 
> 
> Assume we can build the fiber plant for 1 million USD (*). This fiber can 
> be depreciated over 25 years. That means we only take USD 40,000/year of 
> the company profit. 
> 
> The copper plant is already there but the DSLAM is missing. Assume USD 100 
> per port plus USD 100 per DSL CPE. This equipment can only be depreciated 
> over 5 years. With 1700 ports this gives USD 68,000/year of the company 
> profit. 
> 

a 48 port dslam is 2200 (still awaiting cots on line cards for above 
mentioned chassis) so its about 45 per port, CPE is about 50 a device 
in bulk (inc 4 gb ports, wifi) 

The copper exists, there is no ripping it out 

Due to location RF links are used for data, so no need to give each 
cabin "future proof" since unless a carrier will run fibre to us for 
100's miles at their cost - it just aint happenin, the cost is 
extremely prohibitive. 

> Not claiming these number are anything but fantasy as I know nothing about 
> the layout of the project. Just illustrating that sometimes more money now 
> does not necessary means less profit for a company. 
> 
> (*) yes 1700 installs could be done for that in optimum circumstances. It 
> could also be much more expensive, all depending. 
> 
> Regards, 
> 
> Baldur 
> 

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Baldur Norddahl]

Hi Nick

Have you considered using CPE DSL routers with VoIP and FXP analog out?
Decentralized. That's what everyone are doing here. Might be free depending
on where you get the CPEs.

Or simply getting VoIP handsets. Lots of cheap DECT bases with VoIP.

Regards

Baldur


søn. 10. maj 2020 14.51 skrev Nick Edwards :

> On 5/8/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:
> > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:14 AM Masataka Ohta <
> > mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.
> >>
> >>
> > We are assuming the copper plant is already there otherwise I will
> > respectfully disagree.
> >
> > However the economic is not as simple as you might think. Lets do some
> > calculations.
> >
> > Assume we can build the fiber plant for 1 million USD (*). This fiber can
> > be depreciated over 25 years. That means we only take USD 40,000/year of
> > the company profit.
> >
> > The copper plant is already there but the DSLAM is missing. Assume USD
> 100
> > per port plus USD 100 per DSL CPE. This equipment can only be depreciated
> > over 5 years. With 1700 ports this gives USD 68,000/year of the company
> > profit.
> >
>
> a 48 port dslam is 2200 (still awaiting cots  on line cards for above
> mentioned chassis) so its about 45 per port, CPE is about 50 a device
> in bulk (inc 4 gb ports, wifi)
>
> The copper exists, there is no ripping it out
>
> Due to location RF links are used for data, so no need to give each
> cabin "future proof" since unless a carrier will run fibre to us for
> 100's miles at their cost - it just aint happenin,  the cost is
> extremely prohibitive.
>
> > Not claiming these number are anything but fantasy as I know nothing
> about
> > the layout of the project. Just illustrating that sometimes more money
> now
> > does not necessary means less profit for a company.
> >
> > (*) yes 1700 installs could be done for that in optimum circumstances. It
> > could also be much more expensive, all depending.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Baldur
> >
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

On 5/8/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:
> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:14 AM Masataka Ohta <
> mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
>
>>
>> Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.
>>
>>
> We are assuming the copper plant is already there otherwise I will
> respectfully disagree.
>
> However the economic is not as simple as you might think. Lets do some
> calculations.
>
> Assume we can build the fiber plant for 1 million USD (*). This fiber can
> be depreciated over 25 years. That means we only take USD 40,000/year of
> the company profit.
>
> The copper plant is already there but the DSLAM is missing. Assume USD 100
> per port plus USD 100 per DSL CPE. This equipment can only be depreciated
> over 5 years. With 1700 ports this gives USD 68,000/year of the company
> profit.
>

a 48 port dslam is 2200 (still awaiting cots  on line cards for above
mentioned chassis) so its about 45 per port, CPE is about 50 a device
in bulk (inc 4 gb ports, wifi)

The copper exists, there is no ripping it out

Due to location RF links are used for data, so no need to give each
cabin "future proof" since unless a carrier will run fibre to us for
100's miles at their cost - it just aint happenin,  the cost is
extremely prohibitive.

> Not claiming these number are anything but fantasy as I know nothing about
> the layout of the project. Just illustrating that sometimes more money now
> does not necessary means less profit for a company.
>
> (*) yes 1700 installs could be done for that in optimum circumstances. It
> could also be much more expensive, all depending.
>
> Regards,
>
> Baldur
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Masataka Ohta]

Baldur Norddahl wrote:


Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.



We are assuming the copper plant is already there


Of course.


Assume we can build the fiber plant for 1 million USD (*).


> (*) yes 1700 installs could be done for that in optimum circumstances.

Optimum?

FTTH to 1700 homes in a newly built apartment building, maybe.

So?

> That probably depends on your country. Here nothing less than 100 Mbps is
> acceptable :-).

That's FTTC, as I already pointed out.

Masataka Ohta

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mike Hammett]

"Acceptable" 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Baldur Norddahl"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 3:57:35 PM 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 



That probably depends on your country. Here nothing less than 100 Mbps is 
acceptable :-). Just pointing out that is not actually possible without 
rebuilding. 


To his original query I would suggest simply using CPEs with VoIP ports and 
skip analog voice. 


Regards, 


Baldur 




On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 10:03 PM Mel Beckman < m...@beckman.org > wrote: 




Baldur, 


According to Nick Edwards, the OP, the main application is voice, which most 
any DSLAM will handle easily, and solve his IP PBX line consolidation problem. 
Instead of physical lines into the PBX, he can use the integrated DSLAM SIP 
calling capability as the IP PBX interface. Given that only some of the 1700 
lines will be in use simultaneously, that amounts to very little bandwidth. 


Data capacity of 10 or 20 Mbps in this environment would be pure gravy, and 100 
Mbps is almost certainly not expected, or needed, for "worker huts". I'm 
assuming the workers are not all tele-surgeons . 



-mel 



From: NANOG < nanog-boun...@nanog.org > on behalf of Baldur Norddahl < 
baldur.nordd...@gmail.com > 
Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 12:55 PM 
To: nanog@nanog.org < nanog@nanog.org > 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 







On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:05 PM Brandon Martin < lists.na...@monmotha.net > 
wrote: 


On 5/7/20 12:03 PM, Mel Beckman wrote: 
> In the OP’s case however, the copper plant is private, and wholly owned and 
> already in operation. So surely in that situation fiber would be much more 
> expensive to dig and trench. 

Indeed, I was responding to Ohta's comments regarding copper vs. fiber. In this 
case, using DSL over the existing plant seems like a slam dunk unless very high 
speeds are needed or the plant is in very poor condition. Modern VDSL/2 DSLAMs 
are relatively inexpensive and will push 100Mbps over surprising distances with 
essentially seamless fallback to ADSL2+ at ~24Mbps for long-reach situations. 
-- 





Actually we are told the distances are between 300 meters and 1600 meters. 1700 
loops all from a single point. That is going to suck. There will be no 
vectoring and VDSL speeds starts to drop fast after 500 meters. There is going 
to be a ton of crosstalk. 


If you want to deliver 100 Mbps you will need to rebuild the copper plant such 
that you isolate bundles of 192 loops in nearby cabinets. You need to build 
fiber and power out there. You need to invest in multiple decentral DSLAMs. 


Regards, 


Baldur 

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Baldur Norddahl]

That probably depends on your country. Here nothing less than 100 Mbps is
acceptable :-). Just pointing out that is not actually possible without
rebuilding.

To his original query I would suggest simply using CPEs with VoIP ports and
skip analog voice.

Regards,

Baldur


On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 10:03 PM Mel Beckman  wrote:

> Baldur,
>
> According to Nick Edwards, the OP, the main application is voice, which
> most any DSLAM will handle easily, and solve his IP PBX line consolidation
> problem. Instead of physical lines into the PBX, he can use the integrated
> DSLAM SIP calling capability as the IP PBX interface. Given that only some
> of the 1700 lines will be in use simultaneously, that amounts to very
> little bandwidth.
>
> Data capacity of 10 or 20 Mbps in this environment would be pure gravy,
> and 100 Mbps is almost certainly not expected, or needed, for "worker
> huts". I'm assuming the workers are not all tele-surgeons .
>
>  -mel
> --
> *From:* NANOG  on behalf of Baldur Norddahl <
> baldur.nordd...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 7, 2020 12:55 PM
> *To:* nanog@nanog.org 
> *Subject:* Re: alternative to voip gateways
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:05 PM Brandon Martin 
> wrote:
>
> On 5/7/20 12:03 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> > In the OP’s case however, the copper plant is private, and wholly owned
> and already in operation. So surely in that situation fiber would be much
> more expensive to dig and trench.
>
> Indeed, I was responding to Ohta's comments regarding copper vs. fiber.
> In this case, using DSL over the existing plant seems like a slam dunk
> unless very high speeds are needed or the plant is in very poor condition.
> Modern VDSL/2 DSLAMs are relatively inexpensive and will push 100Mbps over
> surprising distances with essentially seamless fallback to ADSL2+ at
> ~24Mbps for long-reach situations.
> --
>
>
> Actually we are told the distances are between 300 meters and 1600 meters.
> 1700 loops all from a single point. That is going to suck. There will be no
> vectoring and VDSL speeds starts to drop fast after 500 meters. There is
> going to be a ton of crosstalk.
>
> If you want to deliver 100 Mbps you will need to rebuild the copper plant
> such that you isolate bundles of 192 loops in nearby cabinets. You need to
> build fiber and power out there. You need to invest in multiple decentral
> DSLAMs.
>
> Regards,
>
> Baldur
>
>
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mel Beckman]

Baldur,

According to Nick Edwards, the OP, the main application is voice, which most 
any DSLAM will handle easily, and solve his IP PBX line consolidation problem. 
Instead of physical lines into the PBX, he can use the integrated DSLAM SIP 
calling capability as the IP PBX interface. Given that only some of the 1700 
lines will be in use simultaneously, that amounts to very little bandwidth.

Data capacity of 10 or 20 Mbps in this environment would be pure gravy, and 100 
Mbps is almost certainly not expected, or needed, for "worker huts". I'm 
assuming the workers are not all tele-surgeons .

 -mel

From: NANOG  on behalf of Baldur Norddahl 

Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 12:55 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways



On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:05 PM Brandon Martin 
mailto:lists.na...@monmotha.net>> wrote:
On 5/7/20 12:03 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> In the OP’s case however, the copper plant is private, and wholly owned and 
> already in operation. So surely in that situation fiber would be much more 
> expensive to dig and trench.

Indeed, I was responding to Ohta's comments regarding copper vs. fiber.  In 
this case, using DSL over the existing plant seems like a slam dunk unless very 
high speeds are needed or the plant is in very poor condition.  Modern VDSL/2 
DSLAMs are relatively inexpensive and will push 100Mbps over surprising 
distances with essentially seamless fallback to ADSL2+ at ~24Mbps for 
long-reach situations.
--

Actually we are told the distances are between 300 meters and 1600 meters. 1700 
loops all from a single point. That is going to suck. There will be no 
vectoring and VDSL speeds starts to drop fast after 500 meters. There is going 
to be a ton of crosstalk.

If you want to deliver 100 Mbps you will need to rebuild the copper plant such 
that you isolate bundles of 192 loops in nearby cabinets. You need to build 
fiber and power out there. You need to invest in multiple decentral DSLAMs.

Regards,

Baldur

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Baldur Norddahl]

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:05 PM Brandon Martin 
wrote:

> On 5/7/20 12:03 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> > In the OP’s case however, the copper plant is private, and wholly owned
> and already in operation. So surely in that situation fiber would be much
> more expensive to dig and trench.
>
> Indeed, I was responding to Ohta's comments regarding copper vs. fiber.
> In this case, using DSL over the existing plant seems like a slam dunk
> unless very high speeds are needed or the plant is in very poor condition.
> Modern VDSL/2 DSLAMs are relatively inexpensive and will push 100Mbps over
> surprising distances with essentially seamless fallback to ADSL2+ at
> ~24Mbps for long-reach situations.
> --
>

Actually we are told the distances are between 300 meters and 1600 meters.
1700 loops all from a single point. That is going to suck. There will be no
vectoring and VDSL speeds starts to drop fast after 500 meters. There is
going to be a ton of crosstalk.

If you want to deliver 100 Mbps you will need to rebuild the copper plant
such that you isolate bundles of 192 loops in nearby cabinets. You need to
build fiber and power out there. You need to invest in multiple decentral
DSLAMs.

Regards,

Baldur

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Brandon Martin]

On 5/7/20 12:03 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> In the OP’s case however, the copper plant is private, and wholly owned and 
> already in operation. So surely in that situation fiber would be much more 
> expensive to dig and trench. 

Indeed, I was responding to Ohta's comments regarding copper vs. fiber.  In 
this case, using DSL over the existing plant seems like a slam dunk unless very 
high speeds are needed or the plant is in very poor condition.  Modern VDSL/2 
DSLAMs are relatively inexpensive and will push 100Mbps over surprising 
distances with essentially seamless fallback to ADSL2+ at ~24Mbps for 
long-reach situations.
-- 
Brandon Martin

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Baldur Norddahl]

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:14 AM Masataka Ohta <
mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:

>
> Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.
>
>
We are assuming the copper plant is already there otherwise I will
respectfully disagree.

However the economic is not as simple as you might think. Lets do some
calculations.

Assume we can build the fiber plant for 1 million USD (*). This fiber can
be depreciated over 25 years. That means we only take USD 40,000/year of
the company profit.

The copper plant is already there but the DSLAM is missing. Assume USD 100
per port plus USD 100 per DSL CPE. This equipment can only be depreciated
over 5 years. With 1700 ports this gives USD 68,000/year of the company
profit.

Not claiming these number are anything but fantasy as I know nothing about
the layout of the project. Just illustrating that sometimes more money now
does not necessary means less profit for a company.

(*) yes 1700 installs could be done for that in optimum circumstances. It
could also be much more expensive, all depending.

Regards,

Baldur

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mel Beckman]

> Brandon Martin said:
> In most of the USA, it's simply not cost-feasible to get access to that  
> unless you either are the ILEC or are a well-established CLEC from a  long 
> time ago. 

Brandon,

In the OP’s case however, the copper plant is private, and wholly owned and 
already in operation. So surely in that situation fiber would be much more 
expensive to dig and trench. 

-mel via cell

> On May 7, 2020, at 8:58 AM, Brandon Martin  wrote:
> 
> On 5/7/20 5:13 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
>> Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.
> 
> Only if you're comparing entirely new copper plant to existing copper  plant 
> (including drops), in my experience.  If you compare greenfield to  
> greenfield, the cost of fiber to the prem is not much greater than  copper 
> (coax or twisted pair).
> 
> If you've already got access to existing copper plant, then reusing at  least 
> the drops is definitely worth looking into, yes.
> 
> In most of the USA, it's simply not cost-feasible to get access to that  
> unless you either are the ILEC or are a well-established CLEC from a  long 
> time ago.  The ILEC mostly gets free reign to set the access costs,  and they 
> set them sufficiently high as to "discourage" competition from  using it 
> where they can get away with it.
> -- 
> Brandon Martin

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Brandon Martin]

On 5/7/20 5:13 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:

Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.


Only if you're comparing entirely new copper plant to existing copper  
plant (including drops), in my experience.  If you compare greenfield to  
greenfield, the cost of fiber to the prem is not much greater than  
copper (coax or twisted pair).


If you've already got access to existing copper plant, then reusing at  
least the drops is definitely worth looking into, yes.


In most of the USA, it's simply not cost-feasible to get access to that  
unless you either are the ILEC or are a well-established CLEC from a  
long time ago.  The ILEC mostly gets free reign to set the access costs,  
and they set them sufficiently high as to "discourage" competition from  
using it where they can get away with it.

--
Brandon Martin

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Masataka Ohta]

Baldur Norddahl wrote:

I own a FTTH based ISP so I believe I know exactly what the cost are. As 
it is we are smashing the copper based competition. A copper plant is 
not free to run and either it can not deliver the expected speed or it 
requires significant investments to get the loop length down.


Expected speed? You should be comparing FTTH and FTTC.

I am not trying to suggest what the OP should do, I am just raising the 
possibility that there might be another way. If you factor in 
deprecation and future proofing of investment, the investment in fiber 
might actually result in the better financial result of the company. 
Even if the initial investment is higher.


Investment for FTTH is 10 times or more than that for plain DSL.

Masataka Ohta

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Baldur Norddahl]

On 06.05.2020 09.34, Simon Lockhart wrote:

On Wed May 06, 2020 at 09:17:28AM +0200, Baldur Norddahl wrote:

If you are converting why would you go for copper instead of fiber? The
typical gpon olt switch can handle 1024 or 2048 users in one rack unit and
equipment is cheap and available.

"since they already have all this copper laid already"

I think you underestimate the cost of civils to replace copper with fibre.

Simon


I own a FTTH based ISP so I believe I know exactly what the cost are. As 
it is we are smashing the copper based competition. A copper plant is 
not free to run and either it can not deliver the expected speed or it 
requires significant investments to get the loop length down. In this 
project the loop lengths and number of loops do not look too good if 
higher speeds are expected.


I am not trying to suggest what the OP should do, I am just raising the 
possibility that there might be another way. If you factor in 
deprecation and future proofing of investment, the investment in fiber 
might actually result in the better financial result of the company. 
Even if the initial investment is higher.


From a technical standpoint it is clear. The GPON solution will work 
and deliver good stable internet and phone service. I believe the copper 
solution has a large chance of unpleasant surprises, it will not be 
future proof in the slightest and the speeds will be poor.


Regards,

Baldur

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Simon Lockhart]

On Wed May 06, 2020 at 09:17:28AM +0200, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> If you are converting why would you go for copper instead of fiber? The
> typical gpon olt switch can handle 1024 or 2048 users in one rack unit and
> equipment is cheap and available.

"since they already have all this copper laid already"

I think you underestimate the cost of civils to replace copper with fibre.

Simon

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Baldur Norddahl]

If you are converting why would you go for copper instead of fiber? The
typical gpon olt switch can handle 1024 or 2048 users in one rack unit and
equipment is cheap and available.

For example this:
https://store.ui.com/collections/operator-ufiber/products/ufiber-olt

Regards

Baldur




ons. 6. maj 2020 05.08 skrev Nick Edwards :

> Been down that road, not a viable option, in fact i'm told if we get
> this done without much drama we'll be converting our existing (much
> smaller) wifi sites to copper as well, and since they already have all
> this copper laid already, might as well use it
>
> On 5/5/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:
> > Thinking out of the box, why not implement a WISP setup using wifi? This
> > kind of gear is more accessible to normal IT staff.
> >
> > Voice can be implemented by VoIP using Wifi too.
> >
> > Regards
> > Baldur
> >
> >
> > søn. 3. maj 2020 07.22 skrev Nick Edwards :
> >
> >> The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them,  are right behind
> >> the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
> >> furtherest  is just under 1 mile
> >>
> >> Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
> >> install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
> >> 150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
> >> since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.
> >>
> >> On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote:
> >> > What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet
> >> but
> >> > you will lose CID before that.
> >> >
> >> > As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
> >> > particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your
> >> application
> >> > if cheap is what makes sense.
> >> >
> >> > My $.02
> >> >
> >> > Jeremy Austin
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov
> >> > 
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from
> >> other
> >> >> vendors.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >> Andrey
> >> >>
> >> >> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
> >> >> написал(а):
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their
> remote
> >> >> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they
> >> >> > go
> >> >> > nowhere past the MDF.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the
> >> >> > workers
> >> >> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
> >> >> > business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper
> >> pairs.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
> >> >> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
> >> >> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
> >> >> > works.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go
> >> >> > somewhere
> >> >> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either
> >> >> > grandstream
> >> >> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48
> >> >> > so
> >> >> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
> >> >> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is
> >> >> > not
> >> >> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
> >> >> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might
> have
> >> >> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a
> >> >> > bunch
> >> >> > of individual gateways.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing
> >> >> > on
> >> >> > a large scale.
> >> >> > Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my
> >> >> > method
> >> >> > acceptable or not for such a project size?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
> >> >> > gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
> >> >> > our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
> >> >> > beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load,
> >> >> > thats
> >> >> > not a problem if we go down the gateway method.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > thoughts?
> >> >>
> >> > --
> >> > Jeremy Austin
> >> > jhaus...@gmail.com
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

Been down that road, not a viable option, in fact i'm told if we get
this done without much drama we'll be converting our existing (much
smaller) wifi sites to copper as well, and since they already have all
this copper laid already, might as well use it

On 5/5/20, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:
> Thinking out of the box, why not implement a WISP setup using wifi? This
> kind of gear is more accessible to normal IT staff.
>
> Voice can be implemented by VoIP using Wifi too.
>
> Regards
> Baldur
>
>
> søn. 3. maj 2020 07.22 skrev Nick Edwards :
>
>> The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them,  are right behind
>> the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
>> furtherest  is just under 1 mile
>>
>> Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
>> install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
>> 150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
>> since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.
>>
>> On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote:
>> > What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet
>> but
>> > you will lose CID before that.
>> >
>> > As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
>> > particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your
>> application
>> > if cheap is what makes sense.
>> >
>> > My $.02
>> >
>> > Jeremy Austin
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov
>> > 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from
>> other
>> >> vendors.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Andrey
>> >>
>> >> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
>> >> написал(а):
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
>> >> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they
>> >> > go
>> >> > nowhere past the MDF.
>> >> >
>> >> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the
>> >> > workers
>> >> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
>> >> > business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
>> >> >
>> >> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper
>> pairs.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
>> >> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
>> >> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
>> >> > works.
>> >> >
>> >> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go
>> >> > somewhere
>> >> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either
>> >> > grandstream
>> >> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48
>> >> > so
>> >> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
>> >> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
>> >> >
>> >> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is
>> >> > not
>> >> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
>> >> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
>> >> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a
>> >> > bunch
>> >> > of individual gateways.
>> >> >
>> >> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing
>> >> > on
>> >> > a large scale.
>> >> > Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my
>> >> > method
>> >> > acceptable or not for such a project size?
>> >> >
>> >> > most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
>> >> > gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
>> >> > our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
>> >> > beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load,
>> >> > thats
>> >> > not a problem if we go down the gateway method.
>> >> >
>> >> > thoughts?
>> >>
>> > --
>> > Jeremy Austin
>> > jhaus...@gmail.com
>> >
>>
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mel Beckman]

I’ve implemented these kinds of systems both ways, and in my experience, unless 
the existing copper is in bad condition, it’s always a cheaper, faster, and 
more reliable solution.

Construction costs to hang outdoor radios and run cables is significant. The 
installation labor for a wireless deployment is intensive. The primary reason 
WISPs exist is to give people Internet who otherwise don’t have cheap copper 
connections available. Line-of-site, growing trees, mobile obstructions, and 
rooftop cable entry are all potential failure points.

An in-place copper plant with short runs below a mile can support 20-30 Mbps 
per user with a DSLAM, and 100+ Mbps using Ethernet-over-Copper, all with no 
construction costs, and virtually maintenance-free.

 -mel beckman

On May 5, 2020, at 5:06 AM, Baldur Norddahl  wrote:


Thinking out of the box, why not implement a WISP setup using wifi? This kind 
of gear is more accessible to normal IT staff.

Voice can be implemented by VoIP using Wifi too.

Regards
Baldur


søn. 3. maj 2020 07.22 skrev Nick Edwards 
mailto:nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com>>:
The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them,  are right behind
the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
furtherest  is just under 1 mile

Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.

On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin mailto:jhaus...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet but
> you will lose CID before that.
>
> As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
> particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your application
> if cheap is what makes sense.
>
> My $.02
>
> Jeremy Austin
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov 
> mailto:a.slaste...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
>> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from other
>> vendors.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrey
>>
>> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
>> > mailto:nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com>>
>> написал(а):
>> >
>> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
>> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
>> > nowhere past the MDF.
>> >
>> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
>> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
>> > business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
>> >
>> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs.
>> >
>> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
>> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
>> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
>> > works.
>> >
>> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
>> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
>> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so
>> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
>> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
>> >
>> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
>> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
>> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
>> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
>> > of individual gateways.
>> >
>> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on
>> > a large scale.
>> > Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method
>> > acceptable or not for such a project size?
>> >
>> > most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
>> > gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
>> > our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
>> > beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats
>> > not a problem if we go down the gateway method.
>> >
>> > thoughts?
>>
> --
> Jeremy Austin
> jhaus...@gmail.com
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mike Hammett]

You can get a support contract on used Calix\Occam gear. A company I started 
helping a couple years ago was able to get a support contract on gear they had 
owned for 15 years. They price the support based on the number of subscribers 
served off of their gear, not how many and which devices you use to do it. I 
could have a chassis per customer and it wouldn't impact the support contract. 


Well, depending on what you mean by support contract. They won't do hardware 
replacement with the contract I have, but the gear is cheap enough, it's just 
easier to replace the gear than to deal with hardware support. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Nick Edwards"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 8:13:51 PM 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 

Thanks guys, much appreciated! 
Company wants new, not second hand, so it's reasonable to get support 
contract - at least for first year or two :) Not a lot should ever 
change once set up, even if staff change, they wont have access to 
residential SIP details anyway. 


On 5/5/20, Brandon Martin  wrote: 
> On 5/4/20 9:44 AM, Colton Conor wrote: 
>> Adtran has a built in web interface too. I it slow, but it does work. I 
>> like CLI better. 
> 
> Oh yeah, I forgot about that. It does work for most day-to-day tasks, 
> though there are some things you can't do from it and have to drop to 
> the CLI for. Overall, I prefer the CLI. 
> -- 
> Brandon Martin 
> 

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Baldur Norddahl]

Thinking out of the box, why not implement a WISP setup using wifi? This
kind of gear is more accessible to normal IT staff.

Voice can be implemented by VoIP using Wifi too.

Regards
Baldur


søn. 3. maj 2020 07.22 skrev Nick Edwards :

> The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them,  are right behind
> the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
> furtherest  is just under 1 mile
>
> Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
> install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
> 150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
> since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.
>
> On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote:
> > What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet
> but
> > you will lose CID before that.
> >
> > As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
> > particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your
> application
> > if cheap is what makes sense.
> >
> > My $.02
> >
> > Jeremy Austin
> >
> > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from
> other
> >> vendors.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Andrey
> >>
> >> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
> >> написал(а):
> >> >
> >> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
> >> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
> >> > nowhere past the MDF.
> >> >
> >> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
> >> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
> >> > business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
> >> >
> >> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper
> pairs.
> >> >
> >> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
> >> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
> >> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
> >> > works.
> >> >
> >> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
> >> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
> >> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so
> >> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
> >> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
> >> >
> >> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
> >> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
> >> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
> >> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
> >> > of individual gateways.
> >> >
> >> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on
> >> > a large scale.
> >> > Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method
> >> > acceptable or not for such a project size?
> >> >
> >> > most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
> >> > gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
> >> > our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
> >> > beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats
> >> > not a problem if we go down the gateway method.
> >> >
> >> > thoughts?
> >>
> > --
> > Jeremy Austin
> > jhaus...@gmail.com
> >
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

Thanks guys, much appreciated!
Company wants new, not second hand, so it's reasonable to get support
contract - at least for first year or two :) Not a lot should ever
change once set up, even if staff change, they wont have access to
residential SIP details anyway.


On 5/5/20, Brandon Martin  wrote:
> On 5/4/20 9:44 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>> Adtran has a built in web interface too. I it slow, but it does work. I
>> like CLI better.
>
> Oh yeah, I forgot about that.  It does work for most day-to-day tasks,
> though there are some things you can't do from it and have to drop to
> the CLI for.  Overall, I prefer the CLI.
> --
> Brandon Martin
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Brandon Martin]

On 5/4/20 9:44 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
Adtran has a built in web interface too. I it slow, but it does work. I 
like CLI better.


Oh yeah, I forgot about that.  It does work for most day-to-day tasks, 
though there are some things you can't do from it and have to drop to 
the CLI for.  Overall, I prefer the CLI.

--
Brandon Martin

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Colton Conor]

Adtran has a built in web interface too. I it slow, but it does work. I
like CLI better.

Overall, the SIP configuration is easy, and ideal for large setups. You
define a sip trunk (not system only supports 1 unfortunately) and then each
port you just add the sip username and password to that port.

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:23 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> The Calix and Occam systems are web based. I find the Occam interface
> easier, but I've used it longer.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>
> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> --
> *From: *"Nick Edwards" 
> *To: *"Mike Hammett" 
> *Cc: *nanog@nanog.org
> *Sent: *Monday, May 4, 2020 5:06:28 AM
> *Subject: *Re: alternative to voip gateways
>
> Thanks, this seems far more cost effective.
> But what about configuration, is it easy enough to configure?
>
> I'm told it must be simple to config and understand and if possible
> web based (im told because I may not always be available they want
> their basic IT staff to be able to understand and if need be make
> changes - which that alone scares me none of them understand anything
> other than windows)
>
> Thanks for all the suggestions
>
> On 5/3/20, Mike Hammett  wrote:
> > If you were to outfit them with three chassis of Calix\Occam B6-252s,
> you'd
> > be under $25k for the whole thing and get ADSL2+ speeds. You would need
> most
> > of a rack to do it.
> >
> >
> > Other platforms may or may not be more cost effective or a better
> solution.
> > Just throwing the idea out there.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > Mike Hammett
> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >
> > Midwest Internet Exchange
> >
> > The Brothers WISP
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >
> > From: "Nick Edwards" 
> > To: "Jeremy Austin" 
> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> > Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 12:21:17 AM
> > Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways
> >
> > The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them, are right behind
> > the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
> > furtherest is just under 1 mile
> >
> > Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
> > install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
> > 150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
> > since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.
> >
> > On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote:
> >> What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet
> but
> >>
> >> you will lose CID before that.
> >>
> >> As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
> >> particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your
> application
> >>
> >> if cheap is what makes sense.
> >>
> >> My $.02
> >>
> >> Jeremy Austin
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov  >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from
> other
> >>>
> >>> vendors.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Andrey
> >>>
> >>> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
> >>> написал(а):
> >>> >
> >>> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
> >>> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they
> go
> >>> >
> >>> > nowhere past the MDF.
> >>> >
> >>> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the
> workers
> >>> >
> >>> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
> >>> > business stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
> >>> >
> >>> > So my plan is to

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mike Hammett]

The Calix and Occam systems are web based. I find the Occam interface easier, 
but I've used it longer. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Nick Edwards"  
To: "Mike Hammett"  
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 5:06:28 AM 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 

Thanks, this seems far more cost effective. 
But what about configuration, is it easy enough to configure? 

I'm told it must be simple to config and understand and if possible 
web based (im told because I may not always be available they want 
their basic IT staff to be able to understand and if need be make 
changes - which that alone scares me none of them understand anything 
other than windows) 

Thanks for all the suggestions 

On 5/3/20, Mike Hammett  wrote: 
> If you were to outfit them with three chassis of Calix\Occam B6-252s, you'd 
> be under $25k for the whole thing and get ADSL2+ speeds. You would need most 
> of a rack to do it. 
> 
> 
> Other platforms may or may not be more cost effective or a better solution. 
> Just throwing the idea out there. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> 
> From: "Nick Edwards"  
> To: "Jeremy Austin"  
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
> Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 12:21:17 AM 
> Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 
> 
> The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them, are right behind 
> the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the 
> furtherest is just under 1 mile 
> 
> Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to 
> install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs 
> 150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k - 
> since the company is not charging them for internet or voice. 
> 
> On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote: 
>> What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet but 
>> 
>> you will lose CID before that. 
>> 
>> As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have 
>> particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your application 
>> 
>> if cheap is what makes sense. 
>> 
>> My $.02 
>> 
>> Jeremy Austin 
>> 
>> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov  
>> wrote: 
>> 
>>> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from other 
>>> 
>>> vendors. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards, 
>>> Andrey 
>>> 
>>> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards  
>>> написал(а): 
>>> > 
>>> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote 
>>> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go 
>>> > 
>>> > nowhere past the MDF. 
>>> > 
>>> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers 
>>> > 
>>> > because the  AKA previous owners of that 
>>> > business stopped the build when they ran into financial problems. 
>>> > 
>>> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs. 
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass 
>>> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare 
>>> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this 
>>> > works. 
>>> > 
>>> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere 
>>> > 
>>> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream 
>>> > 
>>> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so 
>>> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used 
>>> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream. 
>>> > 
>>> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not 
>>> > 
>>> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more 
>>> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have 
>>> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch 
>>> > 
>>> > of individual gateways. 
>>> > 
>>> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on 
>>> > 
>>> > a large scale. 
>>> > Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method 
>>> > 
>>> > acceptable or not for such a project size? 
>>> > 
>>> > most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where 
>>> > gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all 
>>> > our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the 
>>> > beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats 
>>> > not a problem if we go down the gateway method. 
>>> > 
>>> > thoughts? 
>>> 
>> -- 
>> Jeremy Austin 
>> jhaus...@gmail.com 
>> 
> 
> 

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Brandon Martin]

On 5/4/20 6:11 AM, Nick Edwards wrote:

Thanks for suggestion, as per previous, how easy it to configure?
It needs to be understood by laymen if possible,  i'm no layman, but
im no carrier grade networking guru either, most my setups are 300 odd
users, where the gateway and dslam method is cost feasible, but not
when your looking at the numbers of this project - hence reason for my
post:)


I've not used Calix gear, but the Adtran TA5000 supports a Cisco-like 
CLI.  It can also be provisioned entirely using SNMP, if that's more to 
your liking, and in fact that is how Adtran's in-house provisioning 
suite works.  It also has some TL1 support if you really must...


The CLI has some necessary deviations from Cisco IOS, of course, as 
almost all "industry standard" CLIs do, but you can probably pick it up 
pretty quickly.


If you buy new/prime gear directly from an authorized Adtran disty you 
also get their provisioning and monitoring suite (AOE) "free" as long as 
you maintain a support contract (which isn't particularly expensive). 
It's kinda blah (and Flash-based, but I'm told that's changing by the 
end of the year...) but does work.

--
Brandon Martin

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

Thanks for suggestion, as per previous, how easy it to configure?
It needs to be understood by laymen if possible,  i'm no layman, but
im no carrier grade networking guru either, most my setups are 300 odd
users, where the gateway and dslam method is cost feasible, but not
when your looking at the numbers of this project - hence reason for my
post :)

Cheers

On 5/4/20, Mel Beckman  wrote:
> We’ve been implementing similar DSL systems at large campgrounds for years.
> There are a huge number of high-density DSLAM solutions out there, and DSL
> CPE cost practically nothing. As you say, $25K is plenty to pay for the
> hardware, and a rack is plenty of space. The most time consuming part is
> wiring the existing POTS lines into amphenol connectors to plug into the
> DSLAM, 25 pairs at a time.
>
> In addition to Calix\Occam, Adtran‘s TotalAccess solution is worth looking
> into for their carrier-class support.
>
>  -mel beckman
>
> On May 3, 2020, at 5:09 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> 
> If you were to outfit them with three chassis of Calix\Occam B6-252s, you'd
> be under $25k for the whole thing and get ADSL2+ speeds. You would need most
> of a rack to do it.
>
> Other platforms may or may not be more cost effective or a better solution.
> Just throwing the idea out there.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions<http://www.ics-il.com/>
> [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]<https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]<https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange<http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]<https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP<http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]<https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ____
> From: "Nick Edwards" 
> To: "Jeremy Austin" 
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 12:21:17 AM
> Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways
>
> The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them,  are right behind
> the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
> furtherest  is just under 1 mile
>
> Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
> install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
> 150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
> since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.
>
> On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote:
>> What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet
>> but
>> you will lose CID before that.
>>
>> As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
>> particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your
>> application
>> if cheap is what makes sense.
>>
>> My $.02
>>
>> Jeremy Austin
>>
>> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from
>>> other
>>> vendors.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Andrey
>>>
>>> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
>>> написал(а):
>>> >
>>> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
>>> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
>>> > nowhere past the MDF.
>>> >
>>> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
>>> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
>>> > business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
>>> >
>>> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper
>>> > pairs.
>>> >
>>> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
>>> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
>>> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
>>> > works.
>>> >
>>> > OK data done, but... now al

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

Thanks, this seems far more cost effective.
But what about configuration, is it easy enough to configure?

I'm told it must be simple to config and understand and if possible
web based (im told because I may not always be available they want
their basic IT staff to be able to understand and if need be make
changes - which that alone scares me none of them understand anything
other than windows)

Thanks for all the suggestions

On 5/3/20, Mike Hammett  wrote:
> If you were to outfit them with three chassis of Calix\Occam B6-252s, you'd
> be under $25k for the whole thing and get ADSL2+ speeds. You would need most
> of a rack to do it.
>
>
> Other platforms may or may not be more cost effective or a better solution.
> Just throwing the idea out there.
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
>
> The Brothers WISP
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Nick Edwards" 
> To: "Jeremy Austin" 
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 12:21:17 AM
> Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways
>
> The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them, are right behind
> the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
> furtherest is just under 1 mile
>
> Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
> install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
> 150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
> since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.
>
> On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote:
>> What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet but
>>
>> you will lose CID before that.
>>
>> As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
>> particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your application
>>
>> if cheap is what makes sense.
>>
>> My $.02
>>
>> Jeremy Austin
>>
>> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from other
>>>
>>> vendors.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Andrey
>>>
>>> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
>>> написал(а):
>>> >
>>> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
>>> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
>>> >
>>> > nowhere past the MDF.
>>> >
>>> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
>>> >
>>> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
>>> > business stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
>>> >
>>> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
>>> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
>>> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
>>> > works.
>>> >
>>> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
>>> >
>>> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
>>> >
>>> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so
>>> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
>>> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
>>> >
>>> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
>>> >
>>> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
>>> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
>>> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
>>> >
>>> > of individual gateways.
>>> >
>>> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on
>>> >
>>> > a large scale.
>>> > Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method
>>> >
>>> > acceptable or not for such a project size?
>>> >
>>> > most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
>>> > gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
>>> > our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
>>> > beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats
>>> > not a problem if we go down the gateway method.
>>> >
>>> > thoughts?
>>>
>> --
>> Jeremy Austin
>> jhaus...@gmail.com
>>
>
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways - 66 blocks to Amphenol

[Mel Beckman]

Yes, that’s what we use. But it means punching down all the wires all over 
again, or running jumpers if you don’t have enough spare service loop.

-mel via cell

> On May 3, 2020, at 4:20 PM, Allen McKinley Kitchen (gmail) 
>  wrote:
> 
> On May 3, 2020, at 11:09, Mel Beckman  wrote:
>> 
>>   ...
> 
>> The most time consuming part is wiring the existing POTS lines into amphenol 
>> connectors to plug into the DSLAM, 25 pairs at a time. 
> ...
>> 
>> 
>> -mel beckman
> 
> You may already be familiar with this, but leaving it here in case it helps..
> 
> https://www.graybar.com/store/en/gb/s66-pre-wired-m2-series-88233982
> 
> 
> ..Allen

Re: alternative to voip gateways - 66 blocks to Amphenol

[Allen McKinley Kitchen (gmail)]

On May 3, 2020, at 11:09, Mel Beckman  wrote:
> 
>   ...

> The most time consuming part is wiring the existing POTS lines into amphenol 
> connectors to plug into the DSLAM, 25 pairs at a time. 
...
> 
> 
>  -mel beckman

You may already be familiar with this, but leaving it here in case it helps..

https://www.graybar.com/store/en/gb/s66-pre-wired-m2-series-88233982


..Allen

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Colton Conor]

Agreed I would do the Adtran Total Access 5000. What you want is the
"combo" cards. They combine a SIP FXS gateway and DSL port on one port, aka
a Combo port. This would be the way to go, as it doesn't require external
splitters to combine a DSL and Voice signal as you are talking about with
two separate modules.

If cost is a concern, look at Zhone. They have carrier class gear on the
cheap.

BTW, some of these chassis can support like 1000's of lines out of 1 box.
Could do the whole village on a single rack quite easily.

On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 10:09 AM Mel Beckman  wrote:

> We’ve been implementing similar DSL systems at large campgrounds for
> years. There are a huge number of high-density DSLAM solutions out there,
> and DSL CPE cost practically nothing. As you say, $25K is plenty to pay for
> the hardware, and a rack is plenty of space. The most time consuming part
> is wiring the existing POTS lines into amphenol connectors to plug into the
> DSLAM, 25 pairs at a time.
>
> In addition to Calix\Occam, Adtran‘s TotalAccess solution is worth looking
> into for their carrier-class support.
>
>  -mel beckman
>
> On May 3, 2020, at 5:09 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> 
> If you were to outfit them with three chassis of Calix\Occam B6-252s,
> you'd be under $25k for the whole thing and get ADSL2+ speeds. You would
> need most of a rack to do it.
>
> Other platforms may or may not be more cost effective or a better
> solution. Just throwing the idea out there.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>
> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> --
> *From: *"Nick Edwards" 
> *To: *"Jeremy Austin" 
> *Cc: *nanog@nanog.org
> *Sent: *Sunday, May 3, 2020 12:21:17 AM
> *Subject: *Re: alternative to voip gateways
>
> The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them,  are right behind
> the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
> furtherest  is just under 1 mile
>
> Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
> install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
> 150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
> since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.
>
> On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote:
> > What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet
> but
> > you will lose CID before that.
> >
> > As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
> > particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your
> application
> > if cheap is what makes sense.
> >
> > My $.02
> >
> > Jeremy Austin
> >
> > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from
> other
> >> vendors.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Andrey
> >>
> >> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
> >> написал(а):
> >> >
> >> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
> >> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
> >> > nowhere past the MDF.
> >> >
> >> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
> >> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
> >> > business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
> >> >
> >> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper
> pairs.
> >> >
> >> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
> >> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
> >> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
> >> > works.
> >> >
> >> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
> >> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
> 

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mel Beckman]

We’ve been implementing similar DSL systems at large campgrounds for years. 
There are a huge number of high-density DSLAM solutions out there, and DSL CPE 
cost practically nothing. As you say, $25K is plenty to pay for the hardware, 
and a rack is plenty of space. The most time consuming part is wiring the 
existing POTS lines into amphenol connectors to plug into the DSLAM, 25 pairs 
at a time.

In addition to Calix\Occam, Adtran‘s TotalAccess solution is worth looking into 
for their carrier-class support.

 -mel beckman

On May 3, 2020, at 5:09 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:


If you were to outfit them with three chassis of Calix\Occam B6-252s, you'd be 
under $25k for the whole thing and get ADSL2+ speeds. You would need most of a 
rack to do it.

Other platforms may or may not be more cost effective or a better solution. 
Just throwing the idea out there.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions<http://www.ics-il.com/>
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]<https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]<https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
Midwest Internet Exchange<http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]<https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
The Brothers WISP<http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]<https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>

From: "Nick Edwards" 
To: "Jeremy Austin" 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 12:21:17 AM
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways

The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them,  are right behind
the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
furtherest  is just under 1 mile

Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.

On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote:
> What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet but
> you will lose CID before that.
>
> As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
> particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your application
> if cheap is what makes sense.
>
> My $.02
>
> Jeremy Austin
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov 
> wrote:
>
>> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from other
>> vendors.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrey
>>
>> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
>> написал(а):
>> >
>> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
>> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
>> > nowhere past the MDF.
>> >
>> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
>> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
>> > business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
>> >
>> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs.
>> >
>> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
>> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
>> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
>> > works.
>> >
>> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
>> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
>> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so
>> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
>> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
>> >
>> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
>> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
>> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
>> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
>> > of individual gateways.
>> >
>> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mike Hammett]

If you were to outfit them with three chassis of Calix\Occam B6-252s, you'd be 
under $25k for the whole thing and get ADSL2+ speeds. You would need most of a 
rack to do it. 


Other platforms may or may not be more cost effective or a better solution. 
Just throwing the idea out there. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Nick Edwards"  
To: "Jeremy Austin"  
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 12:21:17 AM 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 

The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them, are right behind 
the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the 
furtherest is just under 1 mile 

Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to 
install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs 
150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k - 
since the company is not charging them for internet or voice. 

On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote: 
> What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet but 
> you will lose CID before that. 
> 
> As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have 
> particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your application 
> if cheap is what makes sense. 
> 
> My $.02 
> 
> Jeremy Austin 
> 
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov  
> wrote: 
> 
>> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from other 
>> vendors. 
>> 
>> 
>> Regards, 
>> Andrey 
>> 
>> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards  
>> написал(а): 
>> > 
>> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote 
>> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go 
>> > nowhere past the MDF. 
>> > 
>> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers 
>> > because the  AKA previous owners of that 
>> > business stopped the build when they ran into financial problems. 
>> > 
>> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs. 
>> > 
>> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass 
>> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare 
>> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this 
>> > works. 
>> > 
>> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere 
>> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream 
>> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so 
>> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used 
>> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream. 
>> > 
>> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not 
>> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more 
>> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have 
>> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch 
>> > of individual gateways. 
>> > 
>> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on 
>> > a large scale. 
>> > Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method 
>> > acceptable or not for such a project size? 
>> > 
>> > most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where 
>> > gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all 
>> > our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the 
>> > beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats 
>> > not a problem if we go down the gateway method. 
>> > 
>> > thoughts? 
>> 
> -- 
> Jeremy Austin 
> jhaus...@gmail.com 
> 

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

Thanks, I know the vega marketing says 7 kilometers, I've used them
before at 4 kilometers with at 4REN,  I agree the grandstreams are
cheap and as someone pointed out not very good for line length, I
planned to get my hands on one and test it at furthest location, the
Versa dslams (which are re badged planet's) are running from a private
reply I got  run up to at least 3.5 miles with speeds averaging 16mpbs
down and 1 up, so cheaper gear sounds ok, and my understanding of the
dslams a child can enable it, its very user friendly and I've used
both types of gateways before and both are easy 3 minute setups.

I dont envision huaweis or nokias being 3 step user friendly :)


On 5/2/20, Tarko Tikan  wrote:
> hey,
>
>> But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
>> a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
>> cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
>> an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
>> of individual gateways.
>
> Huawei was already suggested and Nokia ISAM also works very well for
> your application
>
> https://www.nokia.com/networks/products/intelligent-services-access-manager-isam-voice/#overview
>
> Majority of the small consumer gateways (including the 48p ones) will
> not work on long loops, they are ment to be used inside a building etc.
>
>
> --
> tarko
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

The huts or cabins whatever you want to call them,  are right behind
the admin building at entrance, so first is about 300 meters and the
furtherest  is just under 1 mile

Cost will be an issue, Im sure I will have no problems if I have to
install a full rack of gateways and another full of dslams if it costs
150K, over something 1/5th the size in one rack that will cost 200k -
since the company is not charging them for internet or voice.

On 5/2/20, Jeremy Austin  wrote:
> What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet but
> you will lose CID before that.
>
> As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
> particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your application
> if cheap is what makes sense.
>
> My $.02
>
> Jeremy Austin
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov 
> wrote:
>
>> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from other
>> vendors.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrey
>>
>> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
>> написал(а):
>> >
>> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
>> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
>> > nowhere past the MDF.
>> >
>> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
>> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
>> > business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
>> >
>> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs.
>> >
>> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
>> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
>> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
>> > works.
>> >
>> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
>> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
>> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so
>> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
>> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
>> >
>> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
>> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
>> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
>> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
>> > of individual gateways.
>> >
>> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on
>> > a large scale.
>> > Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method
>> > acceptable or not for such a project size?
>> >
>> > most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
>> > gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
>> > our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
>> > beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats
>> > not a problem if we go down the gateway method.
>> >
>> > thoughts?
>>
> --
> Jeremy Austin
> jhaus...@gmail.com
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

Thank you, will do, but I am to assume that this MSAN devices combine
the dslam and voice, like the gateway and dslam all in one? That we
point the dsl to the mikrotik asnd teh voice to our freepbx box?

I have zero experience with high end gear :)

On 5/2/20, Andrey Slastenov  wrote:
> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from other
> vendors.
>
>
> Regards,
> Andrey
>
>> 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
>> написал(а):
>>
>> I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
>> village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
>> nowhere past the MDF.
>>
>> The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
>> because the  AKA previous owners of that
>> business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
>>
>> So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs.
>>
>> I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
>> through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
>> R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
>> works.
>>
>> OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
>> that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
>> 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so
>> theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
>> because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
>>
>> But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
>> a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
>> cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
>> an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
>> of individual gateways.
>>
>> This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on
>> a large scale.
>> Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method
>> acceptable or not for such a project size?
>>
>> most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
>> gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
>> our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
>> beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats
>> not a problem if we go down the gateway method.
>>
>> thoughts?
>

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mike Hammett]

There's likely an enormous amount of ADSL\VDSL DSLAM blades and chassis out 
there that you can pick up for a song. Buy the ones that do POTS and DSL in 
one. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Nick Edwards"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Friday, May 1, 2020 11:20:40 PM 
Subject: alternative to voip gateways 

I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote 
village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go 
nowhere past the MDF. 

The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers 
because the  AKA previous owners of that 
business stopped the build when they ran into financial problems. 

So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs. 

I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass 
through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare 
R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this 
works. 

OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere 
that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream 
48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so 
theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used 
because they are more than twice the price of grandstream. 

But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not 
a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more 
cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have 
an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch 
of individual gateways. 

This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on 
a large scale. 
Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method 
acceptable or not for such a project size? 

most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where 
gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all 
our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the 
beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats 
not a problem if we go down the gateway method. 

thoughts? 

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Shawn L via NANOG]

Innomedia is decent as well, but again it all depends on loop lengths.
 
Might want to look at more of a carrier system.  Something like a Calix E7, E5 
or C7 line.  You could probably pick up a C7 chassis on the used market and 
fill it up with ADSL or VDSL cards that will push dial-tone at least 2x as far 
as they will push DSL.  At least in the 10 mile rage.  Although at some point, 
when you're out past DSL range things like old-school load coils will help with 
call quality.
 


-Original Message-
From: "Tarko Tikan" 
Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2020 3:48am
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways



hey,

> But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
> a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
> cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
> an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
> of individual gateways.

Huawei was already suggested and Nokia ISAM also works very well for 
your application

https://www.nokia.com/networks/products/intelligent-services-access-manager-isam-voice/#overview

Majority of the small consumer gateways (including the 48p ones) will 
not work on long loops, they are ment to be used inside a building etc.


-- 
tarko

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Tarko Tikan]

hey,


But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
of individual gateways.


Huawei was already suggested and Nokia ISAM also works very well for 
your application


https://www.nokia.com/networks/products/intelligent-services-access-manager-isam-voice/#overview

Majority of the small consumer gateways (including the 48p ones) will 
not work on long loops, they are ment to be used inside a building etc.



--
tarko

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Jeremy Austin]

What’s the average loop length? Grandstream is probably OK to 5+ kfeet but
you will lose CID before that.

As the low cost option don’t expect them to be trouble-free (or have
particularly good vendor support), but they might work in your application
if cheap is what makes sense.

My $.02

Jeremy Austin

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:11 PM Andrey Slastenov 
wrote:

> Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from other
> vendors.
>
>
> Regards,
> Andrey
>
> > 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards 
> написал(а):
> >
> > I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
> > village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
> > nowhere past the MDF.
> >
> > The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
> > because the  AKA previous owners of that
> > business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
> >
> > So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs.
> >
> > I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
> > through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
> > R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
> > works.
> >
> > OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
> > that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
> > 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so
> > theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
> > because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
> >
> > But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
> > a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
> > cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
> > an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
> > of individual gateways.
> >
> > This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on
> > a large scale.
> > Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method
> > acceptable or not for such a project size?
> >
> > most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
> > gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
> > our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
> > beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats
> > not a problem if we go down the gateway method.
> >
> > thoughts?
>
-- 
Jeremy Austin
jhaus...@gmail.com

Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Andrey Slastenov]

Look at MSAN solution. Like Huawei UA5000 or similar solutions from other 
vendors.


Regards, 
Andrey

> 2 мая 2020 г., в 07:21, Nick Edwards  написал(а):
> 
> I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
> village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
> nowhere past the MDF.
> 
> The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
> because the  AKA previous owners of that
> business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.
> 
> So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs.
> 
> I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
> through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
> R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
> works.
> 
> OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
> that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
> 48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so
> theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
> because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.
> 
> But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
> a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
> cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
> an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
> of individual gateways.
> 
> This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on
> a large scale.
> Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method
> acceptable or not for such a project size?
> 
> most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
> gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
> our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
> beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats
> not a problem if we go down the gateway method.
> 
> thoughts?

alternative to voip gateways

[Nick Edwards]

I'm looking at a new sister company we just took over, their remote
village has 1700 analogue phone lines to the workers huts, but they go
nowhere past the MDF.

The office runs voip, now i'm told i have to get phones to the workers
because the  AKA previous owners of that
business  stopped the build when they ran into financial problems.

So my plan is to utilize the existing many miles worth of copper pairs.

I'm looking at throwing them into Versa Dslams that use pppoe pass
through, throw in a mikoTik 1036 as pppoe server, and we got spare
R710 i can use as radius server, and by my limited knowledge this
works.

OK data done, but... now all those pots out lines need to go somewhere
that can handle 1700 or more lines, I am looking at either grandstream
48 port FXS gateways or sangoma vega 50 ports (which Ill use as 48 so
theres a 1:1 match with dslams) the vega 3050 probably wont be used
because they are more than twice the price of grandstream.

But this all results in a sh1te load of 48 port gateways (power is not
a concern), but wondering if there is another solution that is more
cost effective? Seems the regular NEC's Siemens and so on might have
an option but I can imagine it will be far more expensive than a bunch
of individual gateways.

This project is in my mind workable, but i've not done such a thing on
a large scale.
Those who have experience in this field care to chime in? is my method
acceptable or not for such a project size?

most pbx's I've done are only few hundred analogue lines where
gateways are more suited and definitely more cost effective, at all
our locations we use freepbx which works perfectly, and we know the
beefyness of the box we'll need to install to handle this load, thats
not a problem if we go down the gateway method.

thoughts?