[cisco-voip] SIP Trunk Provider PRI Handoff or CUBE?

[Ted Nugent]

Yeah my thoughts exactly... This is a pretty simple setup, 4 sites, no
multiplexing or anything crazy like that. He's been considering going to
CUBE at his next hardware refresh but there is no budget now. Redundancy
should still be available although they might need to get creative on
outbound if the D-channel is still up and the SIP is down. Thanks for the
sanity check, now to gently break the news so his head doesn't spin off and
chew out his account team.

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Justin Steinberg <jsteinberg at gmail.com>wrote:

> I don't see any problem with this either.  In fact, with this solution
> there are a number of issues you don't have to worry about such as dtmf
> relay, early offer /delayed offer, fax relay, etc.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Mark Holloway <mh at markholloway.com>wrote:
>
>> Adtran TA900 Integrated Access Devices are widely deployed to SIP to PRI
>> handoffs.  When I worked for a carrier we deployed Adtran for customer who
>> needed 3 PRI's or less to their PBX and Cisco ISR for customer who needed 4
>> or more PRI's to their PBX. Both worked well with SIP trunking into the
>> Service Provider core. I'll caveat and say all Adtran/Cisco devices were
>> talking to Acme Packet SBC's in the core which helps keep everything
>> gracefully manageable.
>>
>>
>> On Jul 26, 2012, at 11:57 AM, Ted Nugent wrote:
>>
>> > I received a call from a former client (I switched partners) that is
>> migrating sites over from PRI to SIP and has an arrangement with his
>> provider that they will provide PRI handoffs via Adtran gateways so that he
>> does not need to purchase additional hardware or licencing. Apparently, His
>> Cisco account team caught wind of this and told him this was against "Cisco
>> Best Practice", that he will experience nothing but problems and needs to
>> have CUBE in place and take SIP directly to CUBE, then proceeded to quote
>> him $50k in upgraded routers and licensing.... This is where I got called
>> and figured before I start up the bus and start tossing people under it I
>> would ask you folks to see if there was anything I might be missing here?
>> Using the PRI handofffs sound reasonable to me since there does not seem to
>> be any compelling reason I can think of to go to CUBE in his situation.
>> > I've seen many clients running SIP trunks with PRI handoffs for the
>> same reasons and to my knowledge have had zero problems.... It sounds to me
>> like it's Cisco's Year End and someone is embellishing the truth to sell
>> unnecessary gear.... Anyone else know of any issues of terminating the SIP
>> trunk on an Adtran and providing a PRI handoff, assuming you don't need
>> more than the 23 channels....?
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cisco-voip mailing list
>> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20120726/ca0b9a8d/attachment.html>