Why not a centralized deployment with only phones and optional gateways in the remote office? Having to manage 110 small ITX boxes does not sound pretty. --martin
> -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew Kitchin (Public) [mailto:mkitchin.pub...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 9:43 PM > To: Martin Steinmann; 'Michael Scheidell'; sipx- > us...@list.sipfoundry.org > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] port 5060/ port 5080, proxy why? > > Using 2 hosts (sipxbridge on a dedicated one) was the other option we > looked at. I didn't do it for 2 reasons. I was a total novice and > wanted to keep things simple. And, our corporate office was the model > we would follow at our 110 small remote locations. We wanted to do > small mini itx (on a bberry, I think that is what they are called) > boxes at the small sites, and adding a second box wasn't practical. > -----Original Message----- > From: "Martin Steinmann" <mstei...@gmail.com> > Sender: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 21:30:34 > To: 'Michael Scheidell'<michael.scheid...@secnap.com>; <sipx- > us...@list.sipfoundry.org> > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] port 5060/ port 5080, proxy why? > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
