If nortel recommended them it was probably b**dt*l. I had 200 tickets with them for one year on one account. I replaced them and all was better. On Dec 30, 2011 12:39 PM, "Gerald Harper" <ger...@sustaa.com> wrote:
> Sorry for jumping into a thread when I had no business, but sometimes > there are a lot of condescending attitudes on this list. > > As for the issue I had: > We had installed 4 Nortel SCS systems for a customer, 3 had analog lines > (Audiocodes GW) and the main system was PRI, (also Audiocodes) each was > also feed with SIP trunks (SIPerator) from a local ITSP that Nortel > recommended. The issue we had involved calls being dropped (or lost in > space) anytime a transfer happened. We opened tickets with Nortel, who in > turn would post here looking for help, (this was nearing the final days for > Nortel and I guess all the good engineers had moved on) but no solution was > ever found. > > Eventually the customer had the systems removed and replaced with Nortel > mICS, (they lost a lot of features but could at least transfer calls) sued > the company I worked for who ended up loosing about $100,000 on the deal. > Not to mention the hours and hours they paid me trying to collect logs and > other info to give to Nortel. Shortly after that they decided that since I > was in on the original decision to recommend the SCS product it would be > better for me to move on as well. > > This is why a jira was never opened. > > On 12/30/2011 4:17 AM, Michael Picher wrote: > > VPRI is just a marketing-guy term for a SIP Trunk.... That's all. > > I too would love to see a Jira on that dropped call issue, I don't > recall this one nor do we have any customers screaming about this. > > As far as an open source mailing list, it is what it is... That's what > we have pay-for support for ;-) > > Thanks, > Mike > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 5:37 AM, Todd Hodgen <thod...@frontier.com> wrote: > >> Mike, contrary to what you say here, I specifically am not sure what a >> VPRI >> is, and yes, after your sigh response, I Googled it and tried to find a >> definition of what it was exactly. >> >> With a telco background, PRI is very specific to me. VPRI could be one of >> many things, and I really was asking what it was in the frame of your >> questions. It wasn't meant to be condescending, and if it was, I >> apologize. >> >> VPRI has nothing to do with me, and apparently is not something that >> anyone >> knows anything about, except the company marketing with that name, so I >> will >> not respond further on this thread. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org >> [mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of >> m...@grounded.net >> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 8:13 PM >> To: sipx-users >> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> >> > Sigh what? Mike, read about PRI - >> >> Sigh... because you took the time to agree with Tony, giving me grief >> while >> at the same time pointing out that you were not doing that. Of course you >> were. Since Tony had already made his point, why did you need to bring it >> up >> again? >> >> You then post a separate reply to the original question when just before >> that, you told me you didn't know what I was talking about. >> >> Sigh because as soon as I point out the obvious such as I am now having to >> do, a few of you must at all costs have fun with this, turning the persons >> post into garbage making points like 'we need to understand'. Does someone >> else feel the need still? >> >> Of course you know what I was asking about, I've seen plenty of people >> talking about virtual PRI's. Who the heck would not know that a VPRI might >> simply be an abbreviation. Doesn't seem to be at the moment but give it >> time >> maybe :). >> >> Bottom line is that there are a few old timers on this list that seem to >> feel the need to be hard nosed to people. Why? Maybe a few of the users >> are >> simply too freaking serious for no good reason. Give it a rest. There is >> no >> reason to be like that with ANYONE on this list. >> No one makes you reply to anything, you don't have to. If you don't like >> how >> someone posts something, it's not your place to be the teacher or know it >> all and tell them how they need to learn everything about VoIP before ever >> taking the chance of using the wrong term while asking a question. God >> forbid! >> >> >That's all I'm saying, and I think that is what Tony was asking - what >> >is it exactly. >> >> A virtual PRI is really just a billing method for a SIP trunk. Figured >> pretty much anyone on this list would know that. >> The question really was, how do I set up sipx so that I can use IP >> authentication to the ITSP over user/password. >> >> Anyways, moving on... >> >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org >> > [mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of >> > m...@grounded.net >> > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 7:08 PM >> > To: sipx-users >> > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> > >> > <sigh> >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:55:11 -0800, Todd Hodgen wrote: >> >> Yes, but what is a virtual PRI? Since PRI is an ISDN standard, what >> is >> > the >> >> non-standard derivative that comes out of a Virtual PRI? What is it >> >> exactly? >> >> >> >> Is it maybe a PRI that is fed out of device that is actually fed via a >> T1 >> >> with SIP trunks on it? If it is, its still a PRI, conforming to the >> PRI >> >> standards, as it should. >> >> >> >> I believe what you are referring to is some companies marketing name >> >> they use for a service they provide. I don't think anyone is giving >> >> you grief, we just have no idea what you are talking about since we >> >> haven't had the pleasure of reading the material you have, and really >> >> haven't a clue what this VPRI is. >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org >> >> [mailto:sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of >> >> m...@grounded.net >> >> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 3:02 PM >> >> To: sipx-users >> >> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication >> >> >> >> On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:20:57 -0500, Tony Graziano wrote: >> >>> I dont know VPRI means. If you use terms noone but you might >> >>> understand you might explain it a bit. Throwing that aside... >> >>> >> >> When I don't use the right terms, I get grief and when I use the >> >> terms I'm seeing in docs, I still get grief :). >> >> I would have called it Virtual PRI but flowroute itself seems to call >> >> it VPRI for short. >> >> >> >>> flowroute is a two-edged sword: Use the bandwidth.com template and >> >>> change the bandwidth.com gateway stuff to your flowroute gateway. >> >>> make sure flowroute is swet to send to your ip address and port 5080. >> >>> Very >> >> simple. >> >> >> >> I'll take a look at this. >> >> >> >>> If you use dual wan with flowroute you may have issues if you route >> >>> netblocks or providers via specific wan ports. >> >>> >> >> Flowroute will be the only gateway these sipx servers will know and >> have. >> >> >> >>> flowroute does not control >> >>> the majority of their network and hence, RTP does not come from the >> >>> same IP as the gateway. You pretty much have to open everything to >> >>> use flowroute if you had been in locked down mode. >> >>> >> >> I didn't know this about them and to date, have always used an IP >> >> allow rule for them. >> >> Guess I've been lucky, haven't heard of any missed calls. >> >> >> >> These servers won't have any remote users but I wanted to have a bit >> >> of security in place so figured I would block all but >> >> sip.flowroute.com. Now I seem to have a new problem. >> >> >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 5:10 PM, m...@grounded.net >> >>> <m...@grounded.net> >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> I need to install 4 separate sipx systems in four separate locations. >> >>>> No interoffice communications. >> >>> All of the sipx systems could benefit from the use of a VPRI rather >> >>> than traditional. >> >>> >> >>> I use ITSP's for individual lines when we need an area code that our >> >>> local telco cannot handle. >> >>> On sipx, I usually just create an ITSP device in the gateway >> >>> section and let it authenticate via user name/password. >> >>> >> >>> In this case, due to the number of lines per server (4 to 8), it >> >>> doesn't seem like a good idea to authenticate each and every DID >> >>> individually for example and would prefer using an IP based >> >>> authentication for the whole server. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> I'll be using flowroute for the systems but am not sure how to >> >>>> configure sipx to authenticate once based on IP over a user >> >>>> name/password. I don't see anything which would allow me to do this >> >>>> in the Gateway configuration section. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> Can someone shed some light on this please. >> >>>> >> >>> Thanks very much. >> >>> >> >>> Mike >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> 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/ >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sipx-users mailing list >> sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org >> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ >> > > > > -- > Michael Picher, Director of Technical Services > eZuce, Inc. > > 300 Brickstone Square > > Suite 201 > > Andover, MA. 01810 > O.978-296-1005 X2015 > M.207-956-0262 > @mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher> > www.ezuce.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing listsipx-us...@list.sipfoundry.org > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > > > sustaa Long Distance > The Cheapest way to call Anywhere! > Call 778-383-2374 for more information about our incredibly low rates! > Canada - 0.9¢, USA - 1.9¢, India - 1.5¢ per minute! > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/
