<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000'>thanks Mike, Your points help. <span><br><br></span>I've got much more experience with the digital side, i.e. no experience with FXO, so I'm going to have to use that in my evaluation as well. <span id="7cfbb40c-a4b1-4204-bd00-d872375142d4"><br><br>if the cost is not to much greater, i'd like to lean towards the BRIs. we'll have to see.<br><br><span name="x"></span>---<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 (ANNU)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. <br> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)<br><span name="x"></span><br></span><br><hr id="zwchr"><b>From: </b>"Mike Norton" <mikenorton@pwsd76.ab.ca><br><b>To: </b>"Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio@uoguelph.ca>, "Cisco VoIP List" <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net><br><b>Sent: </b>Thursday, March 21, 2013 3:56:09 PM<br><b>Subject: </b>RE: [cisco-voip] 2xBRI vs 4xFXO at remote site<br><br>
<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;}
@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:0cm;
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:0cm;
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 WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">My remote sites are ultra-rural so POTS is my only option. Certainly, there have been moments where annoyances make me lust for digital connectivity.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Honestly though, even if I did have the choice to use BRI, I doubt it would be cost-effective enough for my use. My regular calling is normally through PRIs
at two main sites and the gateways at the remote sites are only used for 911, and SRST. The goal of my SRST deployments leans more towards the bare-minimum communications needed to keep the sites operating safely, not to provide seamless redundancy of regular
calling. So really, POTS meets my needs adequately enough.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">There are a few benefits to POTS: (1) it’s difficult to screw up 911, (2) you can wire it to an “emergency jack” that onsite people can plug a $10 phone into
during extended power outages (as I mentioned, ultra-rural), and (3) for small quantity of trunks, it’s cheap.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The main annoyances are caller ID and disconnect supervision. For our usage, we simply do without the former, and the latter has only been a serious issue at
one site where the telco was using an ancient FM multiplexer.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">--
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Mike Norton</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I.T. Specialist</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Peace Wapiti School Division No. 76</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Helpdesk: 780-831-3080</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Direct: 780-831-3076</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"" lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"" lang="EN-US"> cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Lelio Fulgenzi<br>
<b>Sent:</b> March-21-13 10:46 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Cisco VoIP List<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [cisco-voip] 2xBRI vs 4xFXO at remote site</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black"><br>
Any thoughts on 2xBRI vs 4xFXO at a remote site? I'm road mapping our telephony infrastructure and would like to propose a scenario whereby we remove our PRI connectivity at the remote sites and have a few lines for emergency inbound/outbound calling. I like
the simplicity of the digital PRI interfaces and I'm assuming the same would be of the BRI options.<br>
<br>
Experiences, good or bad, would be great to hear. <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 (ANNU)<br>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. <br>
- LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)<br>
<br>
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>