[cisco-voip] Moving to SIP

[Haas, Neal]

AT&T does support both indeed. In fact if you want to do faxing over the SIP you need to configure all of your fax numbers with G.711. But we need to keep a bigger bang for out bucks. We have 2 – 20 Meg pipes which is 2 – 300 path trunks. With G.711 we will only get about 2 – 155 (Math in head conversation) path trunks.

Some numbers we might give them better quality just for voice. I had converted over to the SIP trunks temporarily for outgoing and there were no issues. But we need to finish T.38 on that set of routers before we go permanent on the SIP trunks.

Neal Haas
County Of Fresno
IT Analyst - ITSD, Communications
1020 S 10th St
Fresno, CA  93702
Desk 559.600.5890

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Cristobal Priego
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2011 1:30 PM
To: Bill Simon
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Moving to SIP

I think this is an AT&T limitation or as you just mention they want to save bw. I havent work with them on sip trunks however L3, verizon and other ITSP's support both codecs.

Enviado desde mi iPhone

El Sep 25, 2011, a las 11:21, Bill Simon <bills at psu.edu<mailto:bills at psu.edu>> escribió:
Someone please explain why the codec needs to change from G.711u to G.729 simply because of a transition from PRI to SIP?

Does AT&T's SIP service not support G.711? Or are you simply trying to squeeze more channels onto limited bandwidth? (Get more bandwidth.)


On 9/24/11 12:38 PM, Jason Aarons (AM) wrote:
The larger you are the more advantages.  For small business I agree sticking with PRI since you can get them dirt cheap.  For example bank with 700 branches can see a 14 month ROI versus fractional PRIs across all those sites, more mpls bandwidth to branch for video/digital signage, fewer hardware costs, etc.


From: Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca]
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 11:53 AM
To: Jason Aarons (AM)
Cc: Haas, Neal; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Moving to SIP

Anyone else have the feeling SIP isn't all it's cracked up to be? In our case, if you're not already getting Internet service from your your SIP provider, it's just not that economical. Especially if you have to keep a PRI around for faxing, modems, alarms, etc.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 24, 2011, at 10:51 AM, "Jason Aarons (AM)" <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com<mailto:jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>> wrote:
Yes faxing/modem/postage won’t work. Look into separate device pools for g711 stuff, etc.


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 Haas, Neal
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 6:27 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Moving to SIP


We are moving to (ATT) SIP from standard PRI’s, of course we just realized that our unity is G711.

Are there any gotchas by just changing the General Configuration to G729a?


_______________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110926/c0efcdd7/attachment.html>