Talbot
>
> [v1.0.07.109]
>
>
>
> *From:* sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto:
> sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] *On Behalf Of *Michael Picher
> *Sent:* Monday, September 27, 2010 4:35 PM
>
> *To:* Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
> *Subje
...@list.sipfoundry.org
[mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of Michael Picher
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 4:35 PM
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Physical)
Here's what I would do...
users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org on behalf of Michael Picher
> Sent: Sat 9/25/2010 8:52 AM
> To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Physical)
>
> Peter,
>
> I didn't see this asked or offered in the e
AM
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Physical)
Peter,
I didn't see this asked or offered in the email.. How large is this install
anyway? We've got 8K user systems running on 3 servers...
Mike
On Thu, Sep 23,
ike Matt mentioned in one of his replies, a lot
> of responses I get back from the list are not informative enough to be
> helpful.
>
>
>
> Peter Talbot
>
> [v1.0.07.109]
>
>
>
> *From:* sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto:
> sipx-users-boun...@list.si
half Of Tony Graziano
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 11:33 AM
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Cc: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Physical)
(but I don't think it is a "vmware" specific thing,
Telephone & Energy
> > 27515 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula Ca. 92590
> >
> > From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org > boun...@list.sipfoundry.org>
> > To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software > us...@list.sipfoundry.org>
> > Cc: sipx-users-bou
rg>
> To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software us...@list.sipfoundry.org>
> Cc: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org boun...@list.sipfoundry.org>
> Sent: Thu Sep 23 00:48:16 2010
> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Physical)
> R-r-r-r-rig
ust a question on the SBC's, as they are handling voice as well,
> wouldn't there be a (possible) issue with VM.
> TeTeTeTalking with the outside world should be PePePePerfect IMHoHO.
>
> Paul
>
>
> From:
>
> Mark Theis
>
> To:
>
&g
On 9/23/2010 9:14 AM, Douglas Hubler wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Talbot, Peter
> wrote:
>> In further pursuing a ‘Production Rollout’ ready implementation of sipXecs,
>> I had some final questions, mostly in regards to what can and cannot be
>> Virtualized. Currently it is looking
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Talbot, Peter
wrote:
> In further pursuing a ‘Production Rollout’ ready implementation of sipXecs,
> I had some final questions, mostly in regards to what can and cannot be
> Virtualized. Currently it is looking like anything that actually handles
> voice traffic (
2590
*From*: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org
*To*: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
*Cc*: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org
*Sent*: Thu Sep 23 00:48:16 2010
*Subject*: Re: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Physical)
R-r-r-r-right, sipxbridge is a-a
rom:
sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org>
[mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of Talbot, Peter
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 1:43 PM
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: [sipx-users] SIP Server Qu
ide world should be PePePePerfect IMHoHO.
>
> Paul
>
>
> From: Mark Theis To: Discussion list for
> users of sipXecs software Date: 23-09-2010
> 06:40 Subject: Re: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Physical)
> Sent
> by: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org
> --
ubject:
Re: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Physical)
Sent by:
sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org
Peter,
I like your plan. I am not an expert (maybe because I have only been
working with this for a month or so) yet, but…. What were you thinking to
use as your SBC1 and SBC2
ist for users of sipXecs software
Subject: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Physical)
Hi all.
In further pursuing a 'Production Rollout' ready implementation of sipXecs, I
had some final questions, mostly in regards to what can and cannot be
Virtualized. Currently it is
%20email%20footer>
From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org
[mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of Tony Graziano
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 4:42 PM
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] SIP Server Questions (Virtual vs Ph
Ok, noone said anything on this yet, don't take this in any way except free
advice or just a perspective on what I've seen and done.
In reading on some of the other lists (like FreeSwitch users), there is no
"guarantee" that FS will operate properly in a Virtual environment. Resource
planning is v
Hi all.
In further pursuing a 'Production Rollout' ready implementation of sipXecs,
I had some final questions, mostly in regards to what can and cannot be
Virtualized. Currently it is looking like anything that actually handles
voice traffic (whether recorded messages or ongoing conversations)
19 matches
Mail list logo
