On Mon, 2003-07-14 at 12:10, Reed Wade wrote: > At 11:34 AM 7/14/2003 -0500, Steven Critchfield wrote: > > > >One wouldn't use a X100P in a "serious" system. > > > How so? I assume you're talking about scale and not > reliability. We get a relatively small number of calls > but any one of them could be worth a large stack of > cash for our business. A stinky phone system can make > us look bad. > > The main reason I'm looking at Asterisk is to improve > the reliability and control over our phone system. > All the other great things it provides really are > secondary for the folks who pay my salary.
I agree that reliability is THE most important item on a phone system, and if you read the list you will see that most the problems are analog related. So my point is that analog signaling is too problematic for a phone system most of the time. > >Only if you aren't pulling power from the USB bus. There isn't much > >there. > > There may be just enough depending on how many relays are needed, > but it would be too close. I agree, better off not trying to get > power from there. > > I do like the idea of some kind of watchdog functionality. Simply > having power isn't sufficient to trust that a call is getting > routed. This makes me think that you could take this a step further too and incorporate an external power supply and a relay that could interupt mains power so that you could power cycle the PC if the watchdog had power to operate and the PC wasn't responding or generating pings. Then a properly configured machine would start the services up on it's own and move on. This power cycle type of device would have saved me a few minutes of downtime the other day when I froze the kernel on our main phone system. As it was, I just called our colo facility and told them what machine to power cycle. -- Steven Critchfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users