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

[Ted Nugent]

Agreed, agreed and agreed... however after speaking with the customer they
are getting a small cost savings ( nothing really IMO) but more importantly
is the inbound redundancy since the closest site is not on the same CO so
inbound trunksgroup redundancy is not an option. This apparently was the
motivating force for the migration. We've not seen any issues with faxing
or modems using this particular provider in the past using a PRI handoff so
that's really irrelevant at least in this situation. They are 2800 series
routers with IP voice featureset but have you looked at the featureset
upgrade cost and the cost of CUBE sessions??? WHY WOULD ANY PAY THAT if the
provider is giving you that for free and taking on any of the potential
implications with that on their shoulders... seem like a win win to me???








On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Nate VanMaren <VanMarenNP at ldschurch.org>
wrote:
>
> But cost being equal, I’d much rather have a traditional PRI that a
SIP/PRI.  Running stuff through two encode/decode cycles and the problems
that most likely will come with fax/modem/alarms etc.
>
>
>
> If there is plenty of cost savings switching to SIP/PRI, does that fund
the purchase of an SBC to do it straight to the provider?  How old are
these existing PRI gateways that they can’t just be converted to CUBEs?
>
>
>
> -Nate
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ted Nugent
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 1:57 PM
> To: Justin Steinberg
> Cc: Cisco VoIPoE List
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP Trunk Provider PRI Handoff or CUBE?
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you
are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email
and destroy all copies of the original message.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120729/a3178885/attachment.html>