<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000'>Thanks Nate....I think this would be a good discussion. I too would probably agree with a stack of VG224s with SCCP for phones and a stack with MGCP for FAXes and modems. However, I'd agree on this only if (a) the configuration down the entire voice path was as simple and (b) I could get SuperG3 support. Otherwise, I still don't see the advantage. Especially if the fax deployment on the campus is simple fax machines, not fax servers etc.<br><br>What are the advantages of T.38? Will they work with MGCP gateways or do they need H323? Are H323 VG224s even better?<br><br><br>---<br>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>"Bad grammar makes me [sic]" - Tshirt<br><br><br>----- Original Message -----<br>From: "Nate VanMaren" <VanMarenNP@ldschurch.org><br>To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio@uoguelph.ca>, "Paul" <asobihoudai@yahoo.com><br>Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2010 10:55:01 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern<br>Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] Configuring first VG224: MGCP vs. SCCP configurations<br><br>
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="Section1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">I guess I am the only one that is going to disagree.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">I initially configured all of my gateways SCCP when that
protocol was available. It has the best telephony feature set. However, I
have found that those features aren’t used most of the time.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">The biggest use of analog in my mind is faxing. It seems like
the future of faxing is T.38. While SCCP supports Cisco proprietary NSE based T.38,
try and integrate that with even Cisco’s OEMed fax server.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">So I recommend MGCP for at least your fax ports on your VG224 so
that you can run protocol based T.38.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">-Nate</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border-style: solid none none; border-color: rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt medium medium; padding: 3pt 0in 0in;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";">From:</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";">
cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Lelio Fulgenzi<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 06, 2010 6:12 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Paul<br>
<b>Cc:</b> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [cisco-voip] Configuring first VG224: MGCP vs. SCCP
configurations</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; color: black;">I agree. If you are only using them for phones, go for SCCP. Even
for modems and faxes, you can use modem/fax passthrough and things work well.<br>
<br>
Check the list archives for information about how MGCP is a better option for
alarm systems that convey contact information.<br>
<br>
P.S. if you are deploying a few, consider the four-pack. it's cheaper<br>
<br>
---<br>
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)<br>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>
"Bad grammar makes me [sic]" - Tshirt<br>
<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "Paul" <asobihoudai@yahoo.com><br>
To: "Rob Leetun" <rleetun@bouldercounty.org>,
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>
Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2010 7:45:54 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern<br>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Configuring first VG224: MGCP vs. SCCP configurations<br>
<br>
SCCP is superior as a control protocol for VG224s as it not only makes
configuration of the ports extremely easy, it also enables a lot more features
that are otherwise unavailable if MGCP is used as a control protocol.<br>
<br>
SCCP essentially makes the 24 FXS ports into phones you can configure just like
any other IP phone within CCM.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
________________________________<br>
From: "Leetun, Rob" <rleetun@bouldercounty.org><br>
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>
Sent: Wed, January 6, 2010 3:42:45 PM<br>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Configuring first VG224: MGCP vs. SCCP configurations<br>
<br>
<br>
Currently we have many old VG248 dinosaurs in our shop. So<br>
we started the configuration of our first VG224. The question has been
raised<br>
as to use either MGCP or SCCP. Which one is the best and why?<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<br>
Rob<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: '"Helvetica","Tahoma","Arial","sans-serif"';"><font color="#666666"><br><br> 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.</font></span></p><font color="#666666"><br>
</font></div></div></body></html>