atcomsystems.ca/forum Forums VOIP Phones & IP PBX VoIP & Cloud Phones, Hosted PBX, General IP Phones What's so good about VoIP phone systems?

I always have a e911 waiver for VoIP clients. If they want to maintain 911 compatibility then I tell them they will need a POTS line and ATA at the site where the stationary phones will be at.

Interestingly, I spoke to a Qwest tech recently when we were upgrading bandwidth at one of our sites. The guy told me that Qwest might try to get me to move to a full MPLS network to support voice but that in his experience the PRN worked fine for this. I don't think the QOS is as robust with the PRN, but it should work ok in my environment. Since our remote sites connect to the hub via Citrix, the only protocol traffic we have to manage is Citrix, printing, and voice.

Also of note, our account rep was telling me that all the LD traffic to Qwest is routes as IP on their side of things. We do have a dedicated T1 for LD at my site and I haven't had any problems with that in the 6 years or so that we've had it.

I do see some jitter between site and was wondering if anyone know what is considered "acceptable" for this. Of course I'm only measuring jitter by periodic ping tests, so that may not be too accurate. Average response times between sites are anywhere from 12ms to 70ms depending on the site (most are below 25ms), which I suppose is OK for voice packets. Can anyone enlighten me on this?

I'm definately not an expert, but have dealt with jitter a couple of times with clients using SIP. From speaking with a tech at the SIP provider, anything less then 70ms should provide solid voice tranlation. Over 100ms will definately result in packet loss and dropped calls. Hopefully this is what you're looking for. This SIP company uses a program called smokeping, which provides ongoing results for however long you want it to run. We've been able to narrow issues down pretty good with it.

Majic Jack looks at the computer its connected to,
if its not in the registry it ask for the address,
if its been there before it put puts that address
in the 911 display.

I have done TDM for going on 2 decades, and started my first VOIP hardware using extenders to have digital stations at remote offices across the data network on a Toshiba 280 system. I have seen VOIP move from a cool anomoly to a neccesity to augment TDM systems in many situations in order to provide valued added cost effective ways to utilize the customer existing communications infrastructure. That infrastructure does include the public IP access which can provide VPN access for remote/home workers. That is the extent to which I would use the Public IP space, but other than that, IP is what is making TDM compete, and offer new values, and innovations in a way that offers the best of both worlds.

IP trunking is part of the TDM foundation going forward as much as a butt set is in my opinion. That does not require a IP-ONLY PBX which I have worked with as well, but simply a hybrid system in order to have the best of both worlds. I like the IP-only systems I have worked with namely shoretel, but I would not really buy it myself even though I have been invovled in projects where it has served the customer well, and without major issues, or complaints. User interfaces seem to be easier for the end user with IP only systems, and I think that has to do with their software background VS TDM background causing an experience gap in making user applications user friendly. Support from traditional TDM system manufacturers is a cut above the IP only providors, and that is probably from the culture of TDM VS IP in which TDM feels dial tone is an inalienable right. Most IP only systems need to have redundancy in order to be as reliable as TDM, and most of the leaders in IP agree.

That said, my opinion is that hybrids like Avayas IP Office are the wave of the future, and also a great first venture for any organization. I mention the IPO because I support it myself, but it is not the only hybrid out there. I would recomend to anyone looking to new technology to check out the IP Office, and maybe start by hanging one off their main site PBX to use its remote worker, and HUGE conference bridge capabilities that come right in the box without any licensing needed. I know of no more cost effectibve way to add a 64 channel conference bridge, and get to evaluate the platform for other deployments at the same time.

So you recommend the IP Office over the ShoreTel?

I would not say that in all cases, but in almost all cases I would. The Shoretel does expand to more exts than the IPO, but then I would have to bring other systems like the Avaya CM into the picture to consider in the specific application where more exts are required than the IPO can handle.

My signature line does however overide any statements made about any system itself. I can not, and do not recomend any system whatsoever as they can never meet your needs. It takes a great technician to do that with the help of a great project manager without which you are basicaly screwed. The PM, and the tech can be the same person, and often times a PM who was not ever a tech is never going to be a great PM.
The elements of importance are listed in order of least to most importance.
Sales person
Hardware
Project Manager
Technician
I am not sure if the salesperson is low enough on the list.

The specific scenario, and how the individual system fits in that scenario is the only way to decide the best system for only that scenario. There is no blanket statement that covers all applications, or scenarios.

Another question about Shoretel is one may wish to google it, and look into some recent law suits filed against them in reference to their Initial Public Offering going public(SHOR). There stock fell about 70% in a short period recently. I do not claim to know exactly what that means for Shoretel, or it's long term future, as I am not an expert in that area. I do wonder if it has any bearing on their future stability, and ability to support, and progress going forward.

They are however certainly the least implemented system of any on this forum by multiple factors, and represent about one grain of sand in market share in all the deserts, and beaches of the world representing currently implemented systems worldwide. I would bet the PartnerII which has been discontinued for maybe 15 years has more representation in the matter of currently working systems in the field, and it will probably take Shoretel a decade to catch up to the PartnerII numbers of active systems, even though the PartnerII is being replaced as time goes by reducing its deployed numbers.

With the high cost of multi-line appearance VoIP phones, traditional digital keysets are much less expensive.

Whiteywhite,
Have you been shown a ShoreTel demo; if not I would highly recommend one. I have been installing ShoreTel for 3 years now and things are not slowing down. Now with version 8 coming out in June with IM and video point to point, this system rocks. The only thing I think they are weak in is their reporting. Just my 2 cents