Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-22 Thread bill dwyer
More good ideas. I am leaning toward T1 chaining. Although the Adtran Atlas 550 idea seems completely viable as well. Thanks again guys for the great advice. Nate On 10/19/07, Mike Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: bill dwyer wrote: On 10/18/07, *bill dwyer* [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-22 Thread Gregory Boehnlein
I'll second the recommendation for an Adtran Atlast 550. They are great boxes. In the heyday of the Dial Up business, we used to use them in areas where PRI was not available to consolidate BRI circuits into a PRI and feed our equipment. That way we were able to offer 56k and ISDN dial up access

Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-22 Thread Jared Geiger
Straying from the topic a bit, but a co worker of mine said he used to use the Atlas 550 when he worked for a regional cellular provider when channelized T1s were more expensive they'd use it to provision sites with partial T1s. I guess just another test case where they are simple devices, yet

Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-19 Thread Mike Clark
bill dwyer wrote: On 10/18/07, *bill dwyer* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a few questions for the brain trust that is the biz list... Any thoughts, critisims or flaming is welcome. I am looking to use 1 T1 (PRI) to split between 3 systems. Let

Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-18 Thread jcapp
If you use multiple dual T1 cards, you can chain the ISDN PRI and pass on perfect digital calls from one Asterisk system to the next. That way, your tail system can handle fax, etc. Or you could use a quad T1 card to multiplex the T1 to 3 other Asterisk or non-Asterisk systems. Does that help

Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-18 Thread Josh Krueger
You could bring the T1 into one machine, and bring it to the others via TDMoE. Would save money on TDM boards On Oct 18, 2007, at 3:55 PM, bill dwyer wrote: I have a few questions for the brain trust that is the biz list... Any thoughts, critisims or flaming is welcome. I am looking to

Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-18 Thread Mike Clark
bill dwyer wrote: I have a few questions for the brain trust that is the biz list... Any thoughts, critisims or flaming is welcome. I am looking to use 1 T1 (PRI) to split between 3 systems. Let me give you an idea of what we are talking about: 1. Asterisk PBX that runs our internal

[asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-18 Thread bill dwyer
I have a few questions for the brain trust that is the biz list... Any thoughts, critisims or flaming is welcome. I am looking to use 1 T1 (PRI) to split between 3 systems. Let me give you an idea of what we are talking about: 1. Asterisk PBX that runs our internal business phone system, (4

Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-18 Thread Jared Geiger
Also look at an Adtran Atlas 550. You have your one Network PRI/T1 from the telco to one port and then you put in a quad T1 user interface module. Then you can route your DIDs to whichever server they are destined to inside the Adtran's CLI Menu driven interface. It is very simple to work with. if

Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-18 Thread bill dwyer
On 10/18/07, bill dwyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a few questions for the brain trust that is the biz list... Any thoughts, critisims or flaming is welcome. I am looking to use 1 T1 (PRI) to split between 3 systems. Let me give you an idea of what we are talking about: 1. Asterisk PBX

Re: [asterisk-biz] 1 T1, 1 Asterisk PBX, and 1 HylaFax system.

2007-10-18 Thread Jim Capp
Nate, I suggested the the T1 chaining because it provides the highest quality calls. When T1 channels are bridged, they don't pass through the server (PCI bus) at all. All the work is done on the card in native hardware. TDMoE risks latency issues that are tolerable with voice, but not