Our Asterisk server is a P4 2.8GHz (800fsb) running Freebsd and runs fine
but looking to the future I'm wondering how many concurrent VoIP calls this
would be able to handle. Has anyone seen any CPU related issues with
Asterisk in real world environments yet?

Cheers,

P.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists
Sent: 08 March 2006 01:44
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance

Hi Victoria, long time no email ;^)

(Not sure if you were asking me or the other Matt...but here is my reply) 

I am using Asterisk.   I am also getting my trunks directly from an 
ITSP, so I don't have to get PRI channels.  That is much more flexible 
than using PRIs, because all you have to do is add more bandwidth and 
CPU - no messing around with weird interface cards or the like.   Who 
the hell wants PRIs anyway - that would mean dealing with the phone 
company again!  I had enough of that in my first dialup ISP.

FWIW, I think I may have found a solution to the 911 problem.  If we 
could get five or six operators on board, I think we could all solve the 
911 problem together and go forward with our butts covered.  Anyone who 
is interested, hit me offlist ([EMAIL PROTECTED], not this 
email).   If the cost efficiencies pan out correctly - it should be 
right around $10/month per customer to deliver a voip line with an 
inbound DID number and an adequate amount of long distance - with those 
costs going down as volumes increase.  This is using a server sitting at 
the NOC, so quality of the calls will be superior to any other VOIP 
system that someone tries to use on your network.

Catch you later,

Matt Larsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Victoria wrote:

>Matt,
>
>What type VoIP are you beta-testing?
>
>We are currently looking at asterisk, but I am concerned about how many
>subscribers I can maintain per PRI. So far the numbers I am getting do not
>add up to profitability.  I almost makes more sense to resell another
>providers product.
>
>Victoria
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists
>Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 3:21 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance
>
><RANT>
>I've got working VOIP on my network, beta-tested and ready to roll out but
>without e911.  I like VOIP, because I have people subscribing to our
service
>just so they can get Vonage and ditch their land line - but this whole e911
>thing is a fscking nightmare. 
>
>At what point does it make more sense to say screw the 911 and just go
>forward?  Aren't there a bunch of VOIP providers out there doing this
>already?  The cellcos have bought out their 911 requirements year after 
>year.   I sense a court case in the making that will either force 911 
>adoption or throw it out for voip carriers.  It is definitely a gray area
>right now.
>
></RANT>
>
>Matt Larsen
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>Tom DeReggi wrote:
>
>  
>
>>>Revenue: 174.0 million net Loss $189.6million our marketing expenses 
>>>were $176.3million."/
>>>      
>>>
>>Wow.
>>
>>That would support my arguement that there is no part of the equation 
>>more valuable than the portion responsible for the unique access to 
>>the consumer via a verticle sell.
>>
>>So if I'm a wireless company, and its just thirty seconds to say, 
>>"would you like a VOIP phone with that broadband service" at order 
>>time, its worth gold.
>>Way more than 10-14% commissions.  Should we be paying our wholesale 
>>VOIP provider only $5 out of the $25 that we charge? Thats what it 
>>would infer by Vonage's numbers above.
>>Maybe Vonage should have taken partners more seriously?
>>
>>Tom DeReggi
>>RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>>IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
>>Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 2:48 PM
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Because Vonage et al, sell Resi VOIP cheaper than TDM Voice.
>>>Why? Easier to market. Easier to take orders (notice I did not say
>>>sell?)
>>>But termination will be going up (already seeing rising costs for 
>>>Dedicated LD).
>>>E-911 is not cheap (nor is it nationally available).
>>>
>>>You can try to work with a friendly CLEC (or become one).
>>>But Voice is way different from Data.
>>>One bad 911 and you are being sued and possibly jailed.
>>>Wouldn't you rather offer services that aren't competing against the 
>>>growing monster?
>>>You would be better off selling cellular for a residual than selling 
>>>VOIP.
>>>
>>>Vonage was going to IPO last year for $660M; this year they are 
>>>looking for $220M
>>>
>>>In 1Q05:
>>>"Vonage Holdings Corp. Founded in 2001, the Edison (N.J.) provider of 
>>>Internet phone service has raised $210 million and last year racked 
>>>up about $100 million in revenue. It has spent enough on marketing in 
>>>a bid to make itself a household name, and several VCs say it will go 
>>>public this year or next. But critics complain that while its ads 
>>>attract new customers, it doesn't retain as many as it should."
>>>
>>>"Om says Vonage IPO. I don't think they can wait. Reports are their 
>>>growth is slowing, that costs are rising and that founder Jeffrey 
>>>Citron has a bundle of his own cash in the venture."
>>>
>>>In  2006: /"The street writes: Vonage Holdings, moved to become the 
>>>first major Internet telephony player to go public by filing 
>>>Wednesday to raise up to $250 million via an initial offering of 
>>>stock and named a Tyco International executive as CEO. Our revenues 
>>>were $18.7million in 2003, $79.7million in 2004, and $174.0 million 
>>>for the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2005," the company's prospectus 
>>>says."While our revenues have grown rapidly, we have experienced 
>>>increasing net losses, primarily driven by our increase in marketing 
>>>expenses. From the period of inception through Sept.30, 2005, our 
>>>cumulative net loss was $310 million. Our net loss for the nine 
>>>months ended Sept.30, 2005, was $189.6million. During the same 
>>>nine-month period, our marketing expenses were $176.3million."/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Jason Hensley wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>What about for those of us in small markets where the large VoIP 
>>>>players don't have access numbers?  What is your opinion on them 
>>>>coming here? For instance, I'm in an area where the closest VoIP 
>>>>provider's number is 100 miles away with probably 25 or so NXX's 
>>>>that cannot call it locally. Not a feasible decision for a local 
>>>>business as any phone calls to them will be long distance for local 
>>>>residents.  Is there a case for or against partnering / working with 
>>>>a CLEC who has the ability to be WAY more flexible than the ILEC's, 
>>>>have them drop you DS1's / PRI's / whatever and work with them on 
>>>>getting local VoIP numbers for the folks in these areas?  I'm 
>>>>getting more and more people who want wireless Internet SOLELY 
>>>>because they do not have a home phone line other than their cell 
>>>>phone.  Do you see that as what we're headed to?  I do and I don't 
>>>>personally.  I think there will be a market of some kind for that, 
>>>>but I feel as well that for at least the foreseeable future (say 10 
>>>>years or so), markets such as mine will not be doing away with 
>>>>wireline.  Too many challenges for both cellular providers, and 
>>>>WISP's due to terrain and sparseness of population.
>>>>
>>>>I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why it cannot be 
>>>>profitable, at least on some level.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>--
>>>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>      
>>>
>>    
>>
>
>--
>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>  
>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.0/275 - Release Date: 06/03/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.0/276 - Release Date: 07/03/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to