Hi there, regards to PBX's I believe 3CX is now Multi Tenant. Might be worth you taking a look as a non Asterix based platform.
Kind Regards, Alexander Hitchins 01892 800 800 | 07788 423 969 | hitchinsit.co.uk<https://hitchinsit.co.uk/> | @HitchinsIT<https://twitter.com/hitchinsit> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Hitchins I.T. Services Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. Hitchins I.T. Services Ltd. is registered in England and Wales. Company registration number 07729312. Registered address 72A High Street, Battle, East Sussex, United Kingdom, TN33 0AG. ________________________________ From: uknof <[email protected]> on behalf of [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: 09 August 2016 11:26 To: [email protected] Subject: uknof Digest, Vol 92, Issue 8 Send uknof mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.uknof.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uknof or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of uknof digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Virgin Media - Edinburgh, St Andrew Square (=?utf-8?B?TWFydGluIERpdmVyIA==?=) 2. Re: Virgin Media - Edinburgh, St Andrew Square (Peter Knapp) 3. Re: Multi-tenant PBX Solution (James Bensley) 4. Re: Virgin Ethernet Extension (James Bensley) 5. Re: Multi-tenant PBX Solution (Richard Smith) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 10:49:01 +0100 From: "=?utf-8?B?TWFydGluIERpdmVyIA==?=" <[email protected]> To: "=?utf-8?B?dWtub2ZAbGlzdHMudWtub2Yub3JnLnVr?=" <[email protected]> Subject: [uknof] Virgin Media - Edinburgh, St Andrew Square Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Bit of a long shot; anyone on here have VM at the above location? Have been spun a yarn and day before digging and installing (tomorrow) they've now said they can't do it..despite 2 previous visits. Would appreciate a contact at VM/contractors for a detailed explanation as to why. Ta, Mart Sent from my HTC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.uknof.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/private/uknof/attachments/20160809/b1bed990/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 09:53:42 +0000 From: Peter Knapp <[email protected]> To: "Martin Diver " <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [uknof] Virgin Media - Edinburgh, St Andrew Square Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Your VM account manager / planner should be able to tell you the reasons why assuming you?ve contracted the service of course. We have a delivery in Hanover Street which is 2 mins walk from the square, which has been beset with issues and is dragging for a whole list of reasons. I wonder if there is a connection in some way. Peter Knapp From: uknof [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Martin Diver Sent: 09 August 2016 10:49 To: [email protected] Subject: [uknof] Virgin Media - Edinburgh, St Andrew Square Bit of a long shot; anyone on here have VM at the above location? Have been spun a yarn and day before digging and installing (tomorrow) they've now said they can't do it..despite 2 previous visits. Would appreciate a contact at VM/contractors for a detailed explanation as to why. Ta, Mart Sent from my HTC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.uknof.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/private/uknof/attachments/20160809/36f8c3cb/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 11:03:48 +0100 From: James Bensley <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [uknof] Multi-tenant PBX Solution Message-ID: <caawx_pwz4bbizvda95yuukpaxvdjwjmjf3cx3lzerqnqwen...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I've had good success at a former job with https://integrics.com/enswitch/ which is a multi-tenant PBX. Its Asterix under the hood for call routing with their custom application over the top for all the jazzy features. So its Asterix + MySQL (you can use MariaDB) + Apache so you can virtuaise it and scale it. So you can pay for support but still extend Asterix as you please. We built a custom hand set provisioning tool, added custom call features directly in Asterix etc. Cheers, James. ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 11:25:10 +0100 From: James Bensley <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [uknof] Virgin Ethernet Extension Message-ID: <caawx_px8qxqrnrximwhtfdilj6hq433empaqnesfwdbpjvf...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Bit late to this thread. Further to Charlie's input, if you take an NE/NE+ service request and end-to-end MTU check beforehand if you need >1600 MTU. We've had issues were a NE+ circuit for which the NTE supports an MTU up to 2032 won't go above something smaller (exact value escapes me right now) - one of the MetNets it passes through is old with a low MTU. We've also had NE+ circuits where we have asked if we can raise the MTU to support jumbo frames, but we couldn't go above 4470 because there are SDH/SONET MetNets in the middle, but this has been possible on other circuits. Also don't forget their SLAs are pants, 30ms or something. We've have multiple VM NNI's and we've had issues where the PoP that feeds that PoP that our NNI is on, has been congested so our NNI is affected (packet loss across all VNO circuits there), increasing the latency on them all from circa 10ms to just under 30ms so its still within SLA but inter site delay is nearly 60ms for two sites on the same NNI (which is no better than ADSL), and VM they have been very slow to recover it. Also most NE/NE+ circuits are pseudowires across their core. I think the control-word is disabled by default. We have had several instances where we have requested they enabled the pseudowire control-word for that circuit and the issues have been reduced (like out of order packets or jitter). Might be worth ordering all circuits with the control-word enabled by default. Cheers, James. ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 10:26:33 +0000 From: Richard Smith <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [uknof] Multi-tenant PBX Solution Message-ID: <CADGdT71XpXqYP5N3=htfoqqdncag1wmprzs9tw6bvq+ppzx...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Tue, 9 Aug 2016 at 11:05 James Bensley <[email protected]> wrote: > I've had good success at a former job with > https://integrics.com/enswitch/ which is a multi-tenant PBX. > > Its Asterix under the hood for call routing with their custom > application over the top for all the jazzy features. So its Asterix + > MySQL (you can use MariaDB) + Apache so you can virtuaise it and scale > it. > > So you can pay for support but still extend Asterix as you please. We > built a custom hand set provisioning tool, added custom call features > directly in Asterix etc. > I try not to put my oar in to things much when it comes to VoIP discussions generally since many of my employers' customers inhabit the same lists... and it looks bad when you bad mouth products they use.[1] However, it's worth noting that if you're going to be using Asterisk and selling the product to your customers who will in turn rely solely on your product for telephony, you need to make sure you're very aware and up to speed on the legal aspects. >From what I've seen implemented, read up on and inevitably replaced, it's incredibly difficult to build a solution using Asterisk that would be able to survive the test of general condition 4.[2] Forget the shiny web UI, the billing interfaces, systems operations, etc; if you can't maintain an call and lose half your network, you're setting yourself up for a number of very big (and potentially expensive) headaches. ...just my 2p ~ Rich [1] As many who know me will attest, mentioning asterisk in my presence generally earns a scowl or some form of muttering... [2] Out litmus tests for GC4 includes dropping the power on one-half of a disparately located platform. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.uknof.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/private/uknof/attachments/20160809/ac158530/attachment.html> ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ uknof mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uknof.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uknof ------------------------------ End of uknof Digest, Vol 92, Issue 8 ************************************
