J
Joerg
Guest
Don Y wrote:
They all tout QoS as the magic buzzword. But then you have a phone
conference and "We should also discuss the .......ility of ..... lato
..... up" ... "Ahm, could you repeat?". The worst is the low dynamic
range where it seems there is artificial noise piped in or where the
system decides what is a silent period despite the fact that someone in
the background was talking.
If it's in a household without teenagers downloading everything they can
get their hands on it can work. In a company, not so well IME.
Same here. And it's kept separate at all times. I thought about piping
in Skype but found it not to be reliable enough for my taste. It's ok
for one-on-one video links though.
Oh yeah. It's somewhat similar with the newfangled cell stuff. GSM with
its range limits, phone switching over to WiFi at times, and whatnot.
Numerous times I handed my trusty little CDMA phone to someone because
he couldn't get through on his highfalutin $200+ phone.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
Hi Joerg,
On 8/16/2013 2:41 PM, Joerg wrote:
Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:23:55 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:
Actually no. It's enterprises who had a new VoIP system installed.
Mostly by large telco providers and tunning over the same LAN as the
computer stuff (that's IMHO a big mistake).
Yup. Much safer to have an entirely separate LAN.
You don't need a separate *physical* LAN if you can provide QoS
guarantees on a *shared* LAN. E.g., here, I pass video, audio,
general network traffic (HTTP/FTP/etc.) on the same physical lan.
But, enforce what gets routed where very carefully. I think
you can do this with some COTS gear -- but you probably need
more than your nominal IT guy to set it up properly!
They all tout QoS as the magic buzzword. But then you have a phone
conference and "We should also discuss the .......ility of ..... lato
..... up" ... "Ahm, could you repeat?". The worst is the low dynamic
range where it seems there is artificial noise piped in or where the
system decides what is a silent period despite the fact that someone in
the background was talking.
If it's in a household without teenagers downloading everything they can
get their hands on it can work. In a company, not so well IME.
Or leave the old PBX system in there and maybe upgrade that a little,
then use the saved funds to buy everyone a trip to the Caribbean
In my case, run CAT1 (in my case, CAT3 & CAT5) alongside your
network drops *just* for voice service.
Same here. And it's kept separate at all times. I thought about piping
in Skype but found it not to be reliable enough for my taste. It's ok
for one-on-one video links though.
... The office I'm
sitting in now has good quality (Cisco) phones and a separate LAN with
It's pretty good, but there have been outages due to external factors
that don't often happen with gramps' land lines.
I am sticking with gramp's landline. There is a cost but I am willing to
pay for reliability.
Agreed. Having known several friends in need of "emergency services"
recently, I am sure they were happy they "got dialtone" when they
*really* needed it!
Oh yeah. It's somewhat similar with the newfangled cell stuff. GSM with
its range limits, phone switching over to WiFi at times, and whatnot.
Numerous times I handed my trusty little CDMA phone to someone because
he couldn't get through on his highfalutin $200+ phone.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/