|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1 |
1) What equipment is necessary to hook Comdial Executech's (analog) to an MPLS WAN? I was told by the salesrep that a Cisco IAD (Integrated Access Device) is needed. I would appreciate having this verified by straight forward, knowledgeable people who might know of options. 2) The choices for my WAN are either point to point T-1's or MPLS. Cost not being the only factor for a moment, anyone have any insight? My knowledge is that MPLS scales nicely but adds the complexity of the carrier providing QOS. Point to point T-1's don't scale as nicely, but end up being less complex. (We have 6 retail locations in Washington DC metro area. Currently we have T-1's into channel banks. I want to add VOIP soon). Thank you
|
|
|
Visit Atcom to get started with your new business VoIP phone system ASAP
Turn up is quick, painless, and can often be done same day.
Let us show you how to do VoIP right, resulting in crystal clear call quality and easy-to-use features that make everyone happy!
Proudly serving Canada from coast to coast.
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 395
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 395 |
I wouldn't even begin to invest anything concerning those Executech KSU's. Eighteen years ago they were a nice system, but not in todays world of advanced technology you are up against the great Wall of China. Upgrade to a system capable of doing point to multi-point networking via either the clear channel T-1's or IP networking. Vertical (formerly Comdial) has excellent solutions for your desired results. Investigate before investing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 11
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 11 |
MPLS is basically a VPN that is managed by the carrier. It is rapidly replacing the use of Frame-Relay. MPLS will scale better because the carrier is maintaining all the interconnections. Qos is the carriers problem and that "usually" makes it less complex (depending on who the carrier is). With point-to-point circuits you need that main site to be a hub, with each site being a spoke (as I assume you are doing now). If you are doing Analog Voice & Data and want to do it on a single circuit then MPLS will be much easier (and cheaper) to deploy. Just watch your bandwidth allocations.
If you are not using VoIP then you will need an IAD which is basically a CSU, DSU, IP router, and channel bank all in one device. In my experience the Telco Carrier usually supplies these devices as the channelization needs to be maintained by them.
Dave
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4
Member
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4 |
Any Cisco router with MPLS functional cards, and a FXO or an E&M card should do the trick for getting your analogue Voice packetised. After this you will need to setup our PVN end to end.. MPLS is basically a VPN that is managed by the carrier. I would say MPLS would be better desrcibed as closer to Frame than VPN. MPLS is Multiprotocol Label switching, it is a tunneling protocol per say and your IP traffic is encapsulated inside it. QoS policies are injected at your WAN links and the ISP will act on these end to end using a diffSer methology if I am not mistake.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 131
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 131 |
Another option is to use dual VWICs inside a Cisco router and use a regular T1. You could steal some DS0s for voice. An Adtran TSU120e will accomplish the same thing.
Which Executech is this? Most of the systems (N0308-N1024 or K2232) did not support T1. Are you using a DXP? If not as previously stated the E&M/FXO is your path. MY advice, get rid of those old dinosaurs and use G.729 codecs. Deploy Asterisk or CME.
Greg
|
|
|
Forums84
Topics94,513
Posts639,938
Members49,844
|
Most Online5,661 May 23rd, 2018
|
|
0 members (),
246
guests, and
38
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
|