It's probably simpler in his case... He needs to look at each of the different ways to connect a remote site (and he knows what they are already), and decide "if T1 goes down" what happens with the users on that link? How will they know it is down, what is the procedure to find out when it will come back up? Will voicemail work? Who can I (and can't I) call? He also needs to look at what functions/roles play a part... if the T1 goes down due to (example: natural disaster), how will the different departments come into play? I think maybe the public utilities would need a robust connectivity to voice in the event of a natural disaster, but what do I know?
I think he can ask these questions internally, answer them, and come up with an answer. Just because you can do it one way doesn't mean its the best way. There are choices, but noone on this list can make them for him. On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:44 AM, maybelater <maybela...@gmx.de> wrote: > Well, > > > > try to think all possibilities through. > > I don´t think it’s a matter of telephony platform at all, but a matter of > availability , ROI and > > So on. > > I don´t know about US-broadband—access-technology but in the scenario > described by you in germany > > I would strongly advice for redundant internet connection , meaning extra > ISP for internet connection > > In case the T1 goes down (and you don´t want to install a separate server…) > usually when an internet line is down > > It´s not just the access line from that customer alone, but the node that > distributes to several customers in the area. > > So… just getting another (smaller ) internet access from the same provider > just doesn’t cut it. > > > > I would also prefer not also provider redundancy, but media redundancy. > Meaning that if your first internet access > > For voice traffic would be the T1, your backup might be IP over cable , > wifi or something that just does not depends on the copper > > Line… > > > > If the central server is hosted in a strong available-environment > (pro-datacenter ) and your sites are connected redundantly, then I > > Would think because of all your points mentioned before (plug and forget, > manageability, etc) a central setup always beats separate > > Installations for just the same service… to exaggerate: the way I see it it > would be to install a dedicated webserver for every remote site… > > “just in case…”… meaning several machines for just the same purpose… > > > > > > > > > > *Von:* Nathaniel Watkins [mailto:nwatk...@garrettcounty.org] > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 1. Juli 2010 14:08 > *An:* Tony Graziano; maybelater > > *Cc:* sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > *Betreff:* RE: [sipx-users] Remote Location - 45 phones - separate server > or not? > > > > The remote contains these offices (I’m not sure what some of these offices > due – some are State/Federal offices): > > Public Utilities > > Permits & Inspections > > Extension Office > > NRCS & GSCD > > Farm Service Agency > > Rural Development > > Election Board > > > > I totally agree that putting all your eggs in one T1 basket sounds like > crazy talk – however… > > > > Here are thoughts/concerns with a totally separate sipXecs install: > > 1) Manageability > > a. Patton will require additional routing rules for base > functionality > > b. Additional dialing rules to route between sipxósipxóNECóetc. > > c. Greatly complicates the overall design > > 2) Functionality > > a. End users are expecting the capability to plug their phones in > and just work (at any county location) – if we are routing DID’s to the > remote – and they plug their phones in at our Emergency Operations Center – > it needs to just ring there > > 3) Costs > > a. One of the driving factors is reducing costs – having a ‘server’ > (granted could be an inexpensive one), plus failover trunks (handful of POTS > lines), plus additional analog gatways. We are then looking at $2,000 > capital costs and $1,000 annual operating costs. This greatly drives down > the ROI and it seems hard to justify those costs coupled with the added > complexity of managing separate servers (plus having multiple DNS/DHCP > scopes). All to work around a potential 2% business interruption > (considering a potential 1 week down time hazard). > > > > A HA install could be a compromise, but that introduces its own issues - > Perhaps a good compromise of a unified system and failover would be to have > a second route between sites; i.e. have a site to site vpn over the > internet that would be a backup link. In the event of a T1 failure, we > could route traffic over said connection? > > > > In a perfect world, I’d love to have a single, simple to manage phone > system. Not 5 separate systems that I have to link together and have > equipment all over the place that I have to keep tabs on. Of course, I’d > also like to not get fired for killing all of our phones J > > > > > > Nathaniel Watkins > IT Director > Garrett County Government > 203 South 4th Street, Room 210 > Oakland, MD 21550 > Telephone: 301-334-5001 > Fax: 301-334-5021 > E-mail: nwatk...@garrettcounty.org > > > > *From:* sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [mailto: > sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] *On Behalf Of *Tony Graziano > *Sent:* Thursday, July 01, 2010 3:01 AM > *To:* maybelater > *Cc:* sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > *Subject:* Re: [sipx-users] sipx-users Digest, Vol 76, Issue 154 > > > > Nathaniel, > > > > It really needs to be an analysis of "how that branch" functions. Depending > on the role the branch serves within the organization in the event of any > "natural disaster", especially for intra-office communication, relying on a > T1 to call down the hall, upstairs, downstairs, etc, is perhaps > "nonsensical". > > > > A local PSTN gateway for inbound calls to be redirected for a main number, > and for emergency outbound calling pretty well insulates it. With forty or > so workers, 1 T1 only goes so far when it comes to calls:bandwidth. Of > course, for branches with enough users, I always stick with a dedicated > system per branch as I like a higher level of functionality when something > goes down. For instance, if the T1 goes down and they can no longer make > enterprise calls to other branches, they can dial the published number via a > "copper rule" for dialing out via PSTN on a local gateway (as well as 911). > > > > Ultimately there has to be a "weight" to gauge what needs to be available, > and how efficient and connected the branch stays in an outage. With a > separate system the users can: > > > > 1. Continue t have their phones register. > > 2. Call each other. > > 3. Check voicemail. > > 4. Dial around to call out via alternate gateway (analog/siptrunk). > > 5. Call from their desk to bug you to ask you why you haven't fixed it yet. > > 6. Call other branches via their PSTN published number. > > > > Calling patterns, roles and survivability are all factors. > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:26 AM, maybelater <maybela...@gmx.de> wrote: > > I might not be able to configure sipx the way I want, but been working in > sales and system-consulting for 4 years now. > > -breakdown of business telephony is major business killer > -according to Murphy your T1 WILL break down as soon as you rely on it too > much > -rerouting to mobile is great, but what about outbound calls ? > -need of local PSTN-Gateways is totally dependent on the task your > coworkers > on the remote site are doing, the availability they need for their > telephony > > I am a strong believer in centralization, thus I would just configure them > on the central PBX, but there are (of course) scenarios where the customer > Or the situation demands the best possible availability > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org > [mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] Im Auftrag von > sipx-users-requ...@list.sipfoundry.org > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Juli 2010 05:10 > An: sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > Betreff: sipx-users Digest, Vol 76, Issue 154 > > Send sipx-users mailing list submissions to > sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > sipx-users-requ...@list.sipfoundry.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > sipx-users-ow...@list.sipfoundry.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than > "Re: Contents of sipx-users digest..." > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users > Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users > sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/ > > > > > -- > ====================== > Tony Graziano, Manager > Telephone: 434.984.8430 > sip: tgrazi...@voice.myitdepartment.net > Fax: 434.984.8431 > > Email: tgrazi...@myitdepartment.net > > LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk: > Telephone: 434.984.8426 > sip: helpd...@voice.myitdepartment.net > Fax: 434.984.8427 > > Helpdesk Contract Customers: > http://www.myitdepartment.net/gethelp/ > > Why do mathematicians always confuse Halloween and Christmas? > Because 31 Oct = 25 Dec. > > > ------------------------------ > > This message and any files transmitted with it are intended only for the > individual(s) or entity named. If you are not the intended individual(s) or > entity named you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, > distribution or reliance upon its contents is strictly prohibited. If you > have received this in error, please notify the sender, delete the original, > and destroy all copies. Email transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be > secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, > destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Garrett County > Government therefore does not accept any liability for any errors or > omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of email > transmission. > > > Garrett County Government, > 203 South Fourth Street, Courthouse, Oakland, Maryland 21550 > www.garrettcounty.org > -- ====================== Tony Graziano, Manager Telephone: 434.984.8430 sip: tgrazi...@voice.myitdepartment.net Fax: 434.984.8431 Email: tgrazi...@myitdepartment.net LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk: Telephone: 434.984.8426 sip: helpd...@voice.myitdepartment.net Fax: 434.984.8427 Helpdesk Contract Customers: http://www.myitdepartment.net/gethelp/ Why do mathematicians always confuse Halloween and Christmas? Because 31 Oct = 25 Dec.
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
