[kwlug-disc] OT: Roger's phone services

[unsolicited]

Let's remember that all of this complexity exists mostly in:
- VoIP installation / adaptation into current systems.
- Those current systems being of a fair size, thus having a not 
insignificant PBX already in place to be accommodated.
(- sorry Paul.)

If going in new, or going in small, particularly if there's a POTS 
line around for fax or whatever, there's probably more joy and 
happiness, particularly given the cost savings, than not.

To John's point, managing customer expectations up front will garner 
more tolerance.

Also, as mentioned, staged implementation will also provide more joy 
and happiness. Keeping SIP/IP phones out of the picture initially will 
help. As will only adding VoIP lines for the moment. Perhaps migrating 
off POTS lines over time. And, the greatest cost savings will be 
acquired in the process.

It's the phone system + sets replacement cost that bites the most, 
providing the greatest investment, and conceptual hurdle, to be 
overcome. (Sets not being generally compatible with anything other 
than its own system.) Thus, new installations will be easier, if more 
expensive, than the time and cost involved in trying to adapt, or 
morph, from old to new. Of course it can be done - not likely without 
some pain, all around.

Andrew Kohlsmith (mailing lists account) wrote, On 07/19/2010 1:26 PM:
> On Monday, July 19, 2010 01:13:01 pm John Van Ostrand wrote:
>>> I was talking more of the setup where the Nortel system is being
>>> augmented
>>> with VOIP; thus you'd have FXO ATA ports going to the telco and FXS
>>> ATA ports
>>> going to the Nortel.
> 
>> Yup, we're in sync. Incoming call hits the ATA which gets the CID from the
>> SIP header. It then rings the Nortel, which does it's normal thing and
> 
> Not if it's a call from POTS; that's what I was referring to.  There are both 
> FXS (to Nortel) and FXO (from telco) ports; incoming SIP calls have no delay, 
> you are right. But incoming landline calls will have this delay.
> 
>> waits for two rings. That part is normal and shouldn't cause any
>> additional delay. If the call then goes to a Nortel handset, it's all
>> normal. It's only when it goes to a Nortel ATA, then SIP ATA that a
>> additional two rings occur. This would be after a voice menu, so although
>> the caller is inconvenienced there isn't a very long ring happening. Only
>> if the caller was directed to an ATA phone directly, without a voice menu
>> would the caller hear 4 rings too many.
> 
> That's the other location for extraneous rings.  Isn't analog telephony fun? 
> :-/
> 
>> Using DID features, the call goes directly to the extension. (yeah, yeah, 4
>> ring delay.)
> 
> The Meridian systems I had the pleasure of working with had a fixed (and 
> absurdly low) number of DIDs they'd allow to ring an internal extension, so we 
> had to use the macro+IVR method. Unfortunately that doesn't work well if the 
> person's on the phone, and bridging the two audio paths (asterisk ring + 
> nortel's "ringing and extension" ring) caused audio blips that kind of took 
> away from the "magic."
> 
> -A.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org mailing list
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org at kwlug.org
> http://astoria.ccjclearline.com/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
>