[cisco-voip] Verizon SIP vs. PRI?

Wed Feb 9 14:31:46 EST 2011

I still see a lot of PRI(s) on 3945 with SIP/vxml  to CVP 8x (versus H323) and UCCE.  But the amount of SIP work is growing every month….if you don’t know it I would start learning it with some small stuff first. I’ve seen some very large branch projects with centralized Verizon SIP trunks/Acme SBC which mirrored what Nick stated earlier…

I recall in 1985 my team at Sprint griped about having to go to BGP for the Internet backbone from OSPF…….next will be IPv6 grumbling and more SIP….I bet in 10 years SIP will be 95% of new trunks sold.

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bob Zanett (US)
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 9:55 AM
To: Paul; Matthew Loraditch; David Eco; matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com; notariannil1 at scranton.edu
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Verizon SIP vs. PRI?

Paul,
It is not.  SME seems to only fit into a specific silo of very large customers.   I do see CUSP and CUBE being deployed, especially in the contact center area and many of our large customers – we are talking very large BHCA customers are migrating or have migrated to SIP internally already.   I am working with a large service provider that we will be migrating from H323 centric to SIP centric towards the end of this year for their contact center.

Cheers,

Bob

From: Paul [mailto:asobihoudai at yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 6:09 PM
To: Bob Zanett (US); Matthew Loraditch; David Eco; matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com; notariannil1 at scranton.edu
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Verizon SIP vs. PRI?

Are you using CCM session management edition for that customer or is it just one cluster with a lot of centralized SIP trunks? I'm just asking out of curiosity since I've never heard of anyone using session management edition....yet.

________________________________
From: Bob Zanett (US) <bob.zanett at us.didata.com<mailto:bob.zanett at us.didata.com>>
To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>>; David Eco <david.eco at msn.com<mailto:david.eco at msn.com>>; "matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com<mailto:matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com>" <matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com<mailto:matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com>>; "notariannil1 at scranton.edu<mailto:notariannil1 at scranton.edu>" <notariannil1 at scranton.edu<mailto:notariannil1 at scranton.edu>>
Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Sent: Tue, February 8, 2011 1:08:13 PM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Verizon SIP vs. PRI?

I have helped to design, architect and deploy multiple customers with SIP, including SIP trunks carrying contact center calls and also business user calls.  I helped to build out the initial infrastructure of a global medical device firm that almost has all of their US remote offices – literally 100s – migrated onto their centralized SIP trunks.

Are there interoperability issues?  Yes, as each vendor can speak a slightly different dialect.  However, with the onset of some very nice Border Gateways – it is making this a non-issue.  However, as Matthew states below – you need to work with someone who knows what they are doing.

For instance, ROI can be a grey area.  Many times, it is simply a wash and at other times can save a tremendous amount.  Like the example above, each of the remote sites had a least a PRI.  However, many of the offices hardly used 12 b-channels.   By centralizing, they are seeing a very nice savings and they get:

•         Centralized dial plan management

•         Centralized DID control and management

•         On-the-fly call volume adjustment – it is now bandwidth not copper in the ground

•         Economy of scale

http://www.callcentertimes.com/LatestNews/tabid/59/ctl/NewsArticle/mid/407/CategoryID/1/NewsID/173/Default.aspx

Cheers,

Bob

Solutions Architect
Customer Interactive Solutions
Dimension Data

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]<mailto:mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]> On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 2:29 PM
To: David Eco; matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com;<mailto:matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com;> notariannil1 at scranton.edu<mailto:notariannil1 at scranton.edu>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Verizon SIP vs. PRI?

The thing I would say is it all depends on your level of comfort with the Carrier and with SIP. I generally don’t have a problem with the quality of the service when it works, the problem has been troubleshooting and making it work in the first place. I understand how to debug and troubleshoot a T-1 or PRI and can set one up H.323 or MGCP no problem. SIP just doesn’t process for me, Everybody says it’s simple, plain text and all that but I don’t get it.

My point, If you are going with it make sure you or someone you have understands it.

If you have a smaller install one thing you can do is have the provider put in an IAD and hand off as PRI. Make them responsible and make your side something you understand. Obviously in a large campus environment that may not be feasible and defeats some of the consolidation benefits but in a smaller setup it can make life much easier.

Matthew Loraditch, CCVP, CCNA, CCDA
1965 Greenspring Drive
Timonium, MD 21093
support at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:support at heliontechnologies.com>
(p) (410) 252-8830
(F) (443) 541-1593

Visit us at www.heliontechnologies.com<http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>
Support Issue? Email support at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:support at heliontechnologies.com> for fast assistance!

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]<mailto:mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]> On Behalf Of David Eco
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 2:47 PM
To: matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com;<mailto:matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com;> notariannil1 at scranton.edu<mailto:notariannil1 at scranton.edu>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Verizon SIP vs. PRI?

with SIP, you may get more capacity of the channel. But in our case, we have to setup IPSEC VPN with Verizon to utilize their SIP Trunk. Network has to be reliable.

David

> From: matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com<mailto:matthew at ciscovoiceguru.com>
> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 13:43:34 -0600
> To: notariannil1 at scranton.edu<mailto:notariannil1 at scranton.edu>
> CC: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Verizon SIP vs. PRI?
>
> One of my biggest questions right now regarding SIP trunks has been data circuit issues and usability in SRST mode. If your branch office loses it's network connection, will your SIP trunk go down too? If so, then you're up the creek without a paddle.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 8, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Lisa Notarianni <notariannil1 at scranton.edu<mailto:notariannil1 at scranton.edu>> wrote:
>
> > We currently utilize PRI trunks as fail over and backup. They connect to our 6509's.
> >
> > Can anyone share their thoughts on SIP vs. PRI services.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Lisa
> > --
> > <LNsignature.jpg>
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
________________________________
Error! Filename not specified.<http://dimensiondata.stream57.com/04141pm/>

Disclaimer: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information and is for use by the designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you.

________________________________
Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast <%0ahttp:/tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/?fr=oni_on_mail&#news>
with theYahoo! Search weather shortcut.<%0ahttp:/tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/?fr=oni_on_mail&#news>
________________________________
[http://image.exct.net/lib/feed16797d620d/i/2/8c665b10-9.gif]<http://dimensiondata.stream57.com/04141pm/>

Disclaimer: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information and is for use by the designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you.

-----------------------------------------
Disclaimer:

This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
designated addressee(s) named above only.  If you are not the
intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
from your computer. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110209/c11aaa61/attachment.html>