Trunk != extension...

And remote small site connectivity here in the US isn't always cheap and
reliable.  Plus he's talking about a completely separate entity.
On Sep 14, 2011 5:40 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> My view on the world: Simplicity for an extra 4 extensions (as in "4
> trunks") in a remote location can be achieved without an extra SipX.
>
>
>
>
> Good points Todd.
>
> One of my favorite sayings... "simplicity breeds reliability."
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Todd Hodgen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mike, You've entertained that discussion on several occasions during the
> past. From my perspective you are so focused on a single box solution for
> whatever reason, you miss the important part of it - creating a reliable
> platform for voice. Over the years, it's no secret that those that run
> data networks would love to have as reliable a network as those that run
> voice networks. The idea is to make the voice network reliable, and not a
> victim to firewall software issues, or other nonsense that takes away from
> that.
>
> Surely, this beast is complex enough for you, is it not. Why make it more
> complex and unreliable.
>
> Leave the router as a router. Leave the firewall as a firewall, leave the
> voice server as a voice server, and leave your entire network reliable.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 9:36 PM
> To: sipx-users
> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Shared trunks between servers
>
> Hijack the thread, it's all useful information anyhow. However,
> practically
> everything mentioned is overkill :).
> It's just a remote 4 trunk sipx setup which will use G.729 so there won't
> be
> much bandwidth involved.
>
> Using SIP trunks is the simplest install but I'd love to test a vpn back
> to
> the main office from this remote to let it get trunks from the mediant
> directly. That only entails a low bandwidth vpn using pfsense.
>
> I've never set up a vpn using pfsense but it sure would have been nice to
> do
> something directly off of the sipx server in order to eliminate another
> box
> in the mix.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>
>
>
> --
> 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/
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

Reply via email to