[cisco-voip] Cisco AS5000 vs ISR3900

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

I've always thought of the AS5000 as service provider type gateways, independent of call control. If the cost of the 3900 is an issue, you can consider the 2900 series. As long as the total call volume can handle things, then you're good to go. The licensing can get tricky, but if you read the datasheets it can help. 

How are you handling conference calling and trans-coding on your campus? Not sure if the AS5000 can do stuff like this. 


--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1 
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU) 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. 
- LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil) 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Pawlowski" <ajp26 at buffalo.edu> 
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net 
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2012 10:35:55 AM 
Subject: [cisco-voip] Cisco AS5000 vs ISR3900 




I’m looking at some products to try and replace our 6509s and CMMs, which will eventually be EoS/EoL. The notification recommends the ISR series of devices, with PVDMs and VWICs. Since our goal is to eventually operate a CUBE, and transition to SIP trunking, with potential for fallback to a couple of PRIs, this platform would appear capable. Unfortunately, it looks like it also can do “a bunch of other stuff”, which would imply that it is expensive, and licensing will be involved for many of the features of the device. 



The AS5350XM seems like it would do the same thing? The session count is listed at 800 sessions each for CUBE, and it’s a platform license, which would mean that should we configure 3 of these at unique sites, where we have 6-8 PRIs now, that we would be able to more-than dump the entire call capacity to one of these units in case of failure, with room to spare. 



It doesn’t appear it does ISDN backhaul to CCM, not that it was designed to, so it would have to be configured with a SIP trunk to the UCM, is that right? 



Any other comments? Would this put us on the pain train? 
_______________________________________________ 
cisco-voip mailing list 
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/20120802/a09c6723/attachment.html>