[cisco-voip] vg310/320 or ISR4K with analog modules

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

Yeah - I’m a little confused about the new 4K line. There’s one model that you have to populate both slots or it won’t pass configuration. Not sure why.

I did some comparisons between 310/320 and 4K and I think the 310/320 came out ahead. I’d have to go back and check.

-sent from mobile device-

Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1<x-apple-data-detectors://1/0>
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354<tel:519-824-4120;56354> | lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook

[University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]

On Sep 4, 2019, at 4:33 AM, James Andrewartha <jandrewartha at ccgs.wa.edu.au<mailto:jandrewartha at ccgs.wa.edu.au>> wrote:

Hi list,

I just got quoted for replacing our 2x 2921s and 3x VG224s with 2x 4431s and a VG310 with PVDM3-64. We only need 10 or so FXS ports now (faxing is almost dead, and just a few lift phones), should I be asking for a SM-X-16FXS/2FXO instead of the VG310? We're migrating from ISDN to SIP at the same time so presumably the 32 DSPs in the 4431 should suffice? Oh wait, the 4431 has no service module slots ... 3x NIM-4FXSP perhaps then.

Thanks,

--
James Andrewartha
Network & Projects Engineer
Christ Church Grammar School
Claremont, Western Australia
Ph. (08) 9442 1757
Mob. 0424 160 877

On 05/04/19 03:07, Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
Just to get this back on track a bit – I tried configuring base ISR4431 w/ 24FXS and ISR4451 w/72FXS and the per port cost is significantly more than the VG310/VG320 solution.

I’m going to reach out to my acct team to see if there’s anything on the horizon. Maybe something will be announced at Cisco live.


---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook

<image001.png>

From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2019 2:35 PM
To: voyp list, cisco-voip (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>
Subject: [cisco-voip] vg310/320 or ISR4K with analog modules


I see the VG350 has pretty much been EOL’d (February 29, 2024) in favour of ISR4K with high density voice service modules or a VG450 (which is ISR4K based).

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/unified-communications/vg-series-gateways/eos-eol-notice-c51-741597.html

Anybody know if the VG310 and VG320 is going that path? It would be hard to assume so, since the VG400s are very low density and look like they’re replacing the VG202/VG204.

I can’t imagine having to fork out for a ISR4K for 24 or 48 analog ports.

Thoughts?


---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook

<image001.png>




_______________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20190904/769b67c0/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1297 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20190904/769b67c0/attachment.png>