Unfortunately, I think much of the negative feedback about voip.ms mentioned in the original post comes from recent posts from me. I used to recommend them, but can't any more (at least for inbound, depending on your needs). If I remember correctly, I have been with voip.ms since about Jan 2009.
For the people who are using voip.ms, I'm interested to know who's using them to handle their inbound call needs, and if so, what rate centre your DID(s) are in and how reliable you've found them. I haven't experienced many issues with outbound calls with voip.ms. I have experienced the occasional call quality, routing or DTMF issue, but most of the time it's OK and I find the level of service acceptable. However, inbound calls are a different story. My main DID's rate centre is Toronto and I've had quite a few issues with inbound calls. I can usually temporarily workaround the issue by moving to a different server, but I stress "temporarily". If I were using voip.ms mainly as an outbound service, I'd probably be signing their praises. However, our usage is about 50/50 for inbound/outbound. Generally, past problems with outbound calls for us were easily worked around and were not noticed by the customer, so the impact was low. Problems with inbound calls were usually noticed by the customer first, so the impact was high. It just doesn't look good when a customer gets a busy signal, or even worse, a "this number is not in service" message. I currently have an open ticket with them regarding intermittent busy signals on inbound calls (2 more reported this week while registered on the houston server, no CDR entries shown on the voip.ms website when this happens). Based on our experience, I can recommend voip.ms for outbound calls, just as long as you have a backup (which shouldn't be an issue). I can no longer recommend voip.ms for inbound calls on a business line. I am currently looking into other options. If you decide to use voip.ms, I recommend that you do NOT use the toronto servers* for inbound or outbound calls until changes have been made. The toronto2 server has been more unreliable than most. Changes were in the works, but I haven't seen any news about this for at least a couple of months. See the dslreports forum for more info on this. *Please note that the although they list two toronto servers, there's really only one. If you register with toronto, you will be redirected to toronto2. There were two toronto servers for a short period of time, but when toronto went down over a year ago (or has it been two?), they just redirected everything to toronto2. On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Nathaniel Watkins < [email protected]> wrote: > We use voip.ms for all our long distance calling. We are in a situation > where we have to pay for all long distance calls thru our PRI (around > $.065).**** > > ** ** > > As a test, I ran all of our calls thru voip.ms just to see how well it > handled the volume – I had a few issues with DTMF – but call quality and > reliability was acceptable.**** > > ** ** > > Here are our stats for the past 3 months – the only issue is if we have > internet hickups (which does occasionally happen). All of our non-emergency > 911 calls go out thru this as well. We use the newyork pop.**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > **** > > ** ** > > **** > > ** ** > > Nathaniel Watkins > IT Director > Garrett County Government > 203 South 4th Street, Room 210 > Oakland, MD 21550 > Telephone: 301-334-5001 > Fax: 301-334-5021 > E-mail: [email protected]**** > > ** ** > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Todd Hodgen > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:12 PM > > *To:* 'Discussion list for users of sipXecs software' > *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Favorite ITSP... sorry to beat a dead horse*** > * > > ** ** > > I would agree with Mike’s assessment here. I’ve used VOIP.ms for almost > three years now. They are okay, and certainly have improved over the > years. They are much more reliable than they were several years ago. But, > I don’t sell them as a sip trunk solution to my customers.**** > > ** ** > > Having said that, today I still only use them with customers on a limited > basis – emergency need for lines, International calling, etc.**** > > ** ** > > I use Broadvox extensively with my customers, and find their service for > the most part to be very good, on their legacy network only though. I am > currently looking at Simple Signal as well – a California based ITSP.**** > > ** ** > > And to be quite honest, due to the reduction in cost, I am more likely > these days to recommend a PRI over SIP trunks for many customers since PRI > is very cost effective now in our area. When you can get 23 trunks for $400 > or less, with 200 DID, and a block of long distance, it’s hard for these > distant ITSP’s to compete. There is some additional hardware expense with a > gateway, but it is very hard to argue against the quality and reliability of > PRI verses SIP trunks in my opinion.**** > > ** ** > > To add to the use of VOIP.ms – International calling is a great use for > them. Since they are prepaid – you have a hard cutoff for your liability > should you get hacked for international calls. I tend to turn off > International calling with the ITSP’s, and have a VOIP.ms trunk for > International dialing – for $.99 a month, you can’t really go wrong.**** > > ** ** > > Additionally, I’ve had times when a carrier didn’t get their lines > installed in time, and VOIP.ms can be provisioned with new phone numbers, > etc. in minutes to work in a pinch, so they are great to have for many other > purposes, and have been proven to be a real savior for some projects.**** > > ** ** > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Michael Picher > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:59 AM > *To:* Discussion list for users of sipXecs software > *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] Favorite ITSP... sorry to beat a dead horse*** > * > > ** ** > > i like voip.ms but they are a tier 2 or tier 3 player. if you're serious > about sip look to a large player like l3, at&t, global crossing, etc. if > you're less serious but it's still important check out your local clec's. > in either case i'd recommend an ingate for compatibility as the major > players will recognize it and have certified against it.**** > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Matthew Kitchin (public/usenet) < > [email protected]> wrote:**** > > I'm trying to make some recommendations to a company as to what ITSP to > use. I've almost always been locked into Verizon. I wanted to see if > Voip.ms was the overall favorite, or if it is something else. The only > other non Verizon install I did was about 1.5 years ago. I used > bandwidth.com then ant this groups suggestion. That install has worked > fine. I've seen some occasional gripes on this list recently about > Voip.ms, so I wanted to get a fresh take on what others recommend. I > need this to be a reliable carrier. The main office would have about 30 > handsets, and then lots of smaller locations with 5 or 6. Any thoughts > would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks, > Matthew > _______________________________________________ > 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**** > > ------------------------------ > This message and any files transmitted with it are intended only for the > individual(s) or entity named. If you are not the intended individual(s) or > entity named you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, > distribution or reliance upon its contents is strictly prohibited. If you > have received this in error, please notify the sender, delete the original, > and destroy all copies. Email transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be > secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, > destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Garrett County > Government therefore does not accept any liability for any errors or > omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of email > transmission. > > > Garrett County Government, > 203 South Fourth Street, Courthouse, Oakland, Maryland 21550 > www.garrettcounty.org > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >
<<image001.png>>
<<image002.png>>
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
