[cisco-voip] ATA versus VG224

[Mark Snow]

True, thanks!

 

  _____  

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of David Pitkin
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 12:28 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] ATA versus VG224

 

That was true of the ATA-L. They would only support up to 9600.

 

The newer ATA186-I1 and ATA186-I2 support 14.4

 

http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/770/fn17440.shtml

 

David

 

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark Snow
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 12:10 PM
To: 'TechGuy'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] ATA versus VG224

 

The ATA is a very low-end device. It will support Faxing, but only up to
9600 baud (need to hardcode your Fax machine down to this speed, and turn
ECM off). The ATA will not support a modem (though folks have reported
credit card machines working with an ATA).

The VG248 supports faster Fax speeds of 14.4 and low end modems.

The VG224 is the newest device, has the newest DSP's and supports higher
speed faxing and higher speed modems - though neither at V.90 speeds or
fully supporting the SuperG3 faxing speeds.

 

Make sure that you are running all your gateways with a IOS type NSE payload
(100) and that you are running Fax-Passthrough on every device, and not fax
relay.

 

-Mark Snow

CCIE Voice #14073

 

  _____  

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of TechGuy
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 11:48 AM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ATA versus VG224

 

Can anyone share with me some benefits of using a VG224 over a bunch of
ATA's?  Particularly interested in the pro's of a VG224 for fax machines
over the use of ATA's?

 



 

On 12/5/05, Ortiz, Carlos <CORTIZ at broward.org> wrote: 

The VG224's work really well with MGCP.  The only issue I have had is that
there is a bug with AAA on the VG224 that is addressed in newer versions of
code, but that would require a memory upgrade.  The best thing I can tell
you about them is that I installed one about 1 year ago and another about 9
months ago.  Haven't touched them since... :-) 

 

 

  _____  

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of TechGuy
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 10:51 AM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] ATA versus VG224

 

Can someone share with me thoughts on ATA's versus VG224.  I have heard that
the VG224 is a little more reliable and less problamatic then the ATA's 

 

I believe the VG224 is a little more flexible in how you can configure it?
Mainly looking for something to handle a bunch of fax machines.  Looking for
the most reliable MGCP solution. 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20051205/af92b2d4/attachment.html