<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@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;}
/* 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;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:black;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></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]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>As long as you don’t need the SIP specific features, such as some of the redundancy, etc. The telco is giving you a PRI, if a PRI is all you need, old fashion old school, then you would be fine.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>Dennis Heim</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>Sr. UC Engineer<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>World Wide Technology<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>Office: 314.212.1814<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>Email: <a href="mailto:dennis.heim@wwt.com"><span style='color:blue'>dennis.heim@wwt.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'><a href="http://www.wwt.com/"><span style='color:blue'>www.wwt.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ted Nugent<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:57 AM<br><b>To:</b> Cisco VoIPoE List<br><b>Subject:</b> [cisco-voip] SIP Trunk Provider PRI Handoff or CUBE?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>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.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>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....?<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></body></html>