Ok, so that's like 2 year ago software... so much has been done to the system since then... Plus, I've said it before and I'll say it again, if you're really serious about SIP trunks and you have a system of any size, look to a real Session Border Controller like an Ingate or an Acme. People will spend the money for a gateway but not for a proper SBC...
Thanks for sticking around the list though, sounds like that was a bad situation. Hopefully you've landed in a better spot. Mike On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Gerald Harper <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry for jumping into a thread when I had no business, but sometimes > there are a lot of condescending attitudes on this list. > > As for the issue I had: > We had installed 4 Nortel SCS systems for a customer, 3 had analog lines > (Audiocodes GW) and the main system was PRI, (also Audiocodes) each was > also feed with SIP trunks (SIPerator) from a local ITSP that Nortel > recommended. The issue we had involved calls being dropped (or lost in > space) anytime a transfer happened. We opened tickets with Nortel, who in > turn would post here looking for help, (this was nearing the final days for > Nortel and I guess all the good engineers had moved on) but no solution was > ever found. > > Eventually the customer had the systems removed and replaced with Nortel > mICS, (they lost a lot of features but could at least transfer calls) sued > the company I worked for who ended up loosing about $100,000 on the deal. > Not to mention the hours and hours they paid me trying to collect logs and > other info to give to Nortel. Shortly after that they decided that since I > was in on the original decision to recommend the SCS product it would be > better for me to move on as well. > > This is why a jira was never opened. > > > On 12/30/2011 4:17 AM, Michael Picher wrote: > > VPRI is just a marketing-guy term for a SIP Trunk.... That's all. > > I too would love to see a Jira on that dropped call issue, I don't > recall this one nor do we have any customers screaming about this. > > As far as an open source mailing list, it is what it is... That's what > we have pay-for support for ;-) > > Thanks, > Mike > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 5:37 AM, Todd Hodgen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Mike, contrary to what you say here, I specifically am not sure what a >> VPRI >> is, and yes, after your sigh response, I Googled it and tried to find a >> definition of what it was exactly. >> >> With a telco background, PRI is very specific to me. VPRI could be one of >> many things, and I really was asking what it was in the frame of your >> questions. It wasn't meant to be condescending, and if it was, I >> apologize. >> >> VPRI has nothing to do with me, and apparently is not something that >> anyone >> knows anything about, except the company marketing with that name, so I >> will >> not respond further on this thread. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >> [email protected] >> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 8:13 PM >> To: sipx-users >> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> >> > Sigh what? Mike, read about PRI - >> >> Sigh... because you took the time to agree with Tony, giving me grief >> while >> at the same time pointing out that you were not doing that. Of course you >> were. Since Tony had already made his point, why did you need to bring it >> up >> again? >> >> You then post a separate reply to the original question when just before >> that, you told me you didn't know what I was talking about. >> >> Sigh because as soon as I point out the obvious such as I am now having to >> do, a few of you must at all costs have fun with this, turning the persons >> post into garbage making points like 'we need to understand'. Does someone >> else feel the need still? >> >> Of course you know what I was asking about, I've seen plenty of people >> talking about virtual PRI's. Who the heck would not know that a VPRI might >> simply be an abbreviation. Doesn't seem to be at the moment but give it >> time >> maybe :). >> >> Bottom line is that there are a few old timers on this list that seem to >> feel the need to be hard nosed to people. Why? Maybe a few of the users >> are >> simply too freaking serious for no good reason. Give it a rest. There is >> no >> reason to be like that with ANYONE on this list. >> No one makes you reply to anything, you don't have to. If you don't like >> how >> someone posts something, it's not your place to be the teacher or know it >> all and tell them how they need to learn everything about VoIP before ever >> taking the chance of using the wrong term while asking a question. God >> forbid! >> >> >That's all I'm saying, and I think that is what Tony was asking - what >> >is it exactly. >> >> A virtual PRI is really just a billing method for a SIP trunk. Figured >> pretty much anyone on this list would know that. >> The question really was, how do I set up sipx so that I can use IP >> authentication to the ITSP over user/password. >> >> Anyways, moving on... >> >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: [email protected] >> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >> > [email protected] >> > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 7:08 PM >> > To: sipx-users >> > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> > >> > <sigh> >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:55:11 -0800, Todd Hodgen wrote: >> >> Yes, but what is a virtual PRI? Since PRI is an ISDN standard, what >> is >> > the >> >> non-standard derivative that comes out of a Virtual PRI? What is it >> >> exactly? >> >> >> >> Is it maybe a PRI that is fed out of device that is actually fed via a >> T1 >> >> with SIP trunks on it? If it is, its still a PRI, conforming to the >> PRI >> >> standards, as it should. >> >> >> >> I believe what you are referring to is some companies marketing name >> >> they use for a service they provide. I don't think anyone is giving >> >> you grief, we just have no idea what you are talking about since we >> >> haven't had the pleasure of reading the material you have, and really >> >> haven't a clue what this VPRI is. >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: [email protected] >> >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >> >> [email protected] >> >> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 3:02 PM >> >> To: sipx-users >> >> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> >> >> >> On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:20:57 -0500, Tony Graziano wrote: >> >>> I dont know VPRI means. If you use terms noone but you might >> >>> understand you might explain it a bit. Throwing that aside... >> >>> >> >> When I don't use the right terms, I get grief and when I use the >> >> terms I'm seeing in docs, I still get grief :). >> >> I would have called it Virtual PRI but flowroute itself seems to call >> >> it VPRI for short. >> >> >> >>> flowroute is a two-edged sword: Use the bandwidth.com template and >> >>> change the bandwidth.com gateway stuff to your flowroute gateway. >> >>> make sure flowroute is swet to send to your ip address and port 5080. >> >>> Very >> >> simple. >> >> >> >> I'll take a look at this. >> >> >> >>> If you use dual wan with flowroute you may have issues if you route >> >>> netblocks or providers via specific wan ports. >> >>> >> >> Flowroute will be the only gateway these sipx servers will know and >> have. >> >> >> >>> flowroute does not control >> >>> the majority of their network and hence, RTP does not come from the >> >>> same IP as the gateway. You pretty much have to open everything to >> >>> use flowroute if you had been in locked down mode. >> >>> >> >> I didn't know this about them and to date, have always used an IP >> >> allow rule for them. >> >> Guess I've been lucky, haven't heard of any missed calls. >> >> >> >> These servers won't have any remote users but I wanted to have a bit >> >> of security in place so figured I would block all but >> >> sip.flowroute.com. Now I seem to have a new problem. >> >> >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 5:10 PM, [email protected] >> >>> <[email protected]> >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> I need to install 4 separate sipx systems in four separate locations. >> >>>> No interoffice communications. >> >>> All of the sipx systems could benefit from the use of a VPRI rather >> >>> than traditional. >> >>> >> >>> I use ITSP's for individual lines when we need an area code that our >> >>> local telco cannot handle. >> >>> On sipx, I usually just create an ITSP device in the gateway >> >>> section and let it authenticate via user name/password. >> >>> >> >>> In this case, due to the number of lines per server (4 to 8), it >> >>> doesn't seem like a good idea to authenticate each and every DID >> >>> individually for example and would prefer using an IP based >> >>> authentication for the whole server. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> I'll be using flowroute for the systems but am not sure how to >> >>>> configure sipx to authenticate once based on IP over a user >> >>>> name/password. I don't see anything which would allow me to do this >> >>>> in the Gateway configuration section. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> Can someone shed some light on this please. >> >>>> >> >>> Thanks very much. >> >>> >> >>> Mike >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> 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/ >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sipx-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> > > > > -- > Michael Picher, Director of Technical Services > eZuce, Inc. > > 300 Brickstone Square > > Suite 201 > > Andover, MA. 01810 > O.978-296-1005 X2015 > M.207-956-0262 > @mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher> > www.ezuce.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > > > sustaa Long Distance > The Cheapest way to call Anywhere! > Call 778-383-2374 for more information about our incredibly low rates! > Canada - 0.9¢, USA - 1.9¢, India - 1.5¢ per minute! > > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > -- Michael Picher, Director of Technical Services eZuce, Inc. 300 Brickstone Square**** Suite 201**** Andover, MA. 01810 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/
