[cisco-voip] ACME Packet

[Nick Matthews]

A lot of the reason ISPs use Acme is that is where Acme started there
focus, where Cisco started their focus in the Enterprise.  Since then
both companies have tried competing in each other's space with
differing levels of success.  Many take the ISPs suggestion, and since
they have more ISP share, they assume Acme is better for the
enterprise.  (Whether it is or not is a different story).

Some of the issues like header passing have been implemented in CUBE
for over a year for what it's worth.

-nick


On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Grant Teague <grant.teague at gmail.com> wrote:
> I currently work in EMEA for a large US Telco, who use Acme as both the Core
> SBC and as a Enterprise SBC. I was actively involved in the testing of the
> Acme 3800 Series before it's released and found it to be a very strong
> product - hence the launch of it is a managed SBC offering.. I tested it
> with Avaya CM 5.X, Microsoft OCSR2 and CUCM 6.X & 7.X.. The one thing that
> jumped out and hit me was it ability to support stateful failover of RTP
> Steams. This was something that we found an advantage over the CUBE, as we
> were not able to get this to work without the CUSP. However my testing is a
> couple of years old now..
>
> From a commercial perspective the Acme is expensive, even compared to the
> CUBE. I also found the like of Audio Codes to be more cost effective
> alternative for Microsoft Lync offering.. However neither are as feature
> rich, but you don't always needs need the amount of features offered by
> Acme.
>
> My final point is that Acme is very complex to configure, but there Systems
> Engineers (I have worked with) are fantastic and have always provided me
> first class support..
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Leslie Meade <lmeade at salientnetworks.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Interesting questionŠ.
>>
>> I asked for RFI's form a few providers, Acme Packet and Cisco were amongst
>> them, for a very large utilities company, and Cisco did not want to enter
>> the bid.. So that that for what is worthŠ
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11-12-13 8:28 AM, "Robert Kulagowski" <rkulagow at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >on't have an AP SBC (but we're considering them), but there's
>> >probably a very good reason why all the big telco players have Acme
>> >Packet SBCs and not CUBE or ASR's.
>> >___
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
> --
> keep living the dream
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>