they are or were pretty useless up in my neck of the woods. On Monday, September 5, 2011, Matthew Kitchin (public/usenet) < [email protected]> wrote: > I definitely don't want to do PRIs, and I do want failover. I will check with TW and confirm they don't have a different product. > I keep finding things that seem to point to a more robust product: > http://www.twtelecom.com/Documents/Resources/PDF/cs/CaseStudy_BoiseState3.pdf > "Eliminated six gateway devices via direct-connect SIP trunk" > "They issued an RFP for a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) trunk that would connect directly to their VoIP PBX. Again tw telecom won the competitive bid." > > On 9/5/2011 1:48 PM, Tony Graziano wrote: > > The advantage I see with voip.Ms is that they have automated failover per number. At the same time you would need to address firewall needs for each site versus the cost for a pri gateway(s). Voip.Ms has a how to for sipx on their wiki now. > On Monday, September 5, 2011, Matthew Kitchin (public/usenet) < [email protected]> wrote: >> If I went with a separate ITSP, is voip.ms everyone's favorite provider these days? It would be two 50+ handset locations and many 6 to 10 handset locations. >> >> On 9/5/2011 6:01 AM, Michael Picher wrote: >> >> The data portion of their solution is typically either a Hybrid Fiber/Coax solution (like most of your cable modems at home) or a Dedicated Fiber solution with some Cisco gear at the customer prem (supports higher bandwidth & more services). >> Their voice solutions are either analog or PRI type hand-offs from gateways. As of my latest understanding they won't hand you a SIP connection. Most of their sales folks may not even know what SIP is even though that is what is handling the connection to the box they put on site. All they really know it as is VoIP. So, this typically requires that you put in gateways to connect to their gateways... Too bad because of course it is a waste of money and a waste of call fidelity. >> Also sometimes their signal coming off their gateways can be a little 'hot' and may cause a little echo. It will take a bit to find an engineer who understands what you are trying to tell them but they may eventually fix it. Most of their field techs are cable runners / box swappers. >> I wouldn't consider them a Tier 1 or 2 provider for business voice. More like a Tier 3. They are OK & relatively inexpensive for the small business space. >> From a data perspective they seem to be pretty good and certainly higher speed and much less expensive than throwing in T3's and such. >> Mike >> >> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Matthew Kitchin (usenet/public) < [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Does anyone have any experience with sipXecs and commercial VoIP services from Time Warner telecom? >>> _______________________________________________ >>> sipx-users mailing list >>> [email protected] <[email protected]> >>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> >> >> >> -- >> Michael Picher >> eZuce >> Director of Technical Services >> O.978-296-1005 X2015 <tel:978-296-1005%20X2015> <tel:978-296-1005 <tel:978-296-1005>%20X2015> >> M.207-956-0262 <tel:207-956-0262> <tel:207-956-0262 <tel:207-956-0262>> >> @mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher> >> www.ezuce.com >> >> >> > > -- > ====================== > Tony Graziano, Manager > Telephone: 434.984.8430 > sip: [email protected] > Fax: 434.465.6833 > > Email:
-- Michael Picher eZuce Director of Technical Services O.978-296-1005 X2015 M.207-956-0262 @mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher> www.ezuce.com
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
