[VoiceOps] Offtopic (SBC recommendations)

Thu Sep 3 12:34:13 EDT 2009

We have been running on 5.1.1 branch for some time and it has been
largely issue-free.

On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 09:14 -0400, Watkins, Jarrett wrote:

> Have any of you been on the 5.1 code?  That's the code that we had major
> issues with.  We went to it, then fell back to 4.1.4p26.....and have now
> bumped up to 6.1.0.
> 
> 6.1.0 has all of the lawful intercept stuff included.....which has
> proven to be pretty cool.
> 
> Again, Acme's have been good. Very easy to configure and do maint.
> on.....but the NBS has been pretty solid too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org
> [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Balmik Soin
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 11:22 PM
> To: Brandon Buckner; voiceops at voiceops.org
> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Offtopic (SBC recommendations)
> 
> We're extremely happy with our Acme 4250s - but then again we started
> with the original Kagoor product (pre-Juniper), so almost anything was
> an improvement. Been on the 4.1 codebase for a while now, in the process
> of moving to 6.1.
> 
> Acme support speed varies noticeably based the priority you set - when
> we've had a serious case (thankfully rare) their support has been
> fantastic, they've been all over it and provided us solutions very fast.
> As others have mentioned, for config assistance/lab stuff they can take
> their time (compared to our other vendors) but we've found that our Acme
> SE will turn things around pretty quick so we tend to use him for that
> sort of thing if we need it faster.
> 
> --
> Balmik Soin [CCIE #19255]
> Voice Operations Manager
> iiNet Limited
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Brandon Buckner <BrandonB at netins.com>
> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 06:30:12 +0800
> To: <voiceops at voiceops.org>
> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Offtopic (SBC recommendations)
> 
> We're also using Acme 4250s. I agree with Jarrett, though: Acme support
> can be rather slow to respond at times. Although in the few years we've
> been running them we've never had the boxes themselves fail, so it's
> mainly just been asking for config suggestions when we wished to
> implement or test new services at lower ticket priority levels.
> 
> ----
> Brandon Buckner
> Switching Technician / VoIP Admin
> Iowa Network Services
> brandonb at netins.com
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org
> [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Watkins, Jarrett
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 4:09 PM
> To: Sorensen, Marty; J. Oquendo; voiceops at voiceops.org
> Subject: [LIKELY JUNK]Re: [VoiceOps] Offtopic (SBC recommendations)
> 
> 
> 
> Same here.  We are primarily using the Acme 4250's but have had the
> Sonus NBS implemented for some time now and haven't had any issues
> there. The Acme's are simple and generally trouble free but we did have
> issues with some of their earlier codes. [random reboots, high cpu, fun
> stuff, etc]
> 
> The main thing is that Sonus support is much better than Acme support!!!
> 
> We're on the 6.1.0 Acme code and all is well so far......
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org
> [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Sorensen, Marty
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 3:00 PM
> To: J. Oquendo; voiceops at voiceops.org
> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Offtopic (SBC recommendations)
> 
> We have Acme 4250s and 4500s presently.  If we were to go out NOW, we
> would take a good hard look at the Sonus Network Border Switch (NBS).
> We looked at them early on during our build out and found them less
> appealing than the Acmes.  Since that time, the appear to have improved
> significantly in terms of capabilities at least on paper.  We have not
> actually tested them yet however in our staging environment.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org
> [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of J. Oquendo
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 11:42 AM
> To: voiceops at voiceops.org
> Subject: [VoiceOps] Offtopic (SBC recommendations)
> 
> 
> Hey all, (I'm sure for those who I criss-cross lists with - you've seen
> it before)...
> 
> We're definitely looking to replace our outgoing Nutrakes
> (pre-audiocodes assimilation) and we've been looking at a few. While I
> will say I'm impressed with Acme and Covergence (which is now Acme
> anyway), anyone care to either off or on list comment about others
> you've had success with. Any particular one with perhaps a pre-paid
> system/spinoff/module/compartment/* (don't ask) is a plus.
> 
> Keep in mind, the less interops (big 4, VZ, GLBX, L3, AT&T) we can do,
> the better! (hooray for less work on the plates).
> 
> So far, as stated, I personally liked Covergence's offering as have I
> Acme, haven't looked at Sonus yet, but was wondering what else are we
> (myself and colleagues) missing. Newport Networks is pretty much gone
> the puppets.com, socks.com, VirtualAvenue, Xoom route of the dinosaur.
> So without further a rambling... Suggestions.
> 
> 
> --
> 
> =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
> J. Oquendo
> SGFA, SGFE, C|EH, CNDA, CHFI, OSCP
> 
> "It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to
> ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things
> differently." - Warren Buffett
> 
> 227C 5D35 7DCB 0893 95AA  4771 1DCE 1FD1 5CCD 6B5E
> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x5CCD6B5E
> 
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> 
> 
> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
> addressee and may contain information that is privileged and
> confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient
> or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
> notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any
> attachments from your system.
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> 
> 
> This email and any attachments ("Message") may contain legally
> privileged and/or confidential information.  If you are not the
> addressee, or if this Message has been addressed to you in error, you
> are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute it, and we ask that you
> please delete it (including all copies) and notify the sender by return
> email.  Delivery of this Message to any person other than the intended
> recipient(s) shall not be deemed a waiver of confidentiality and/or a
> privilege.
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> 
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> 
> 
> This email and any attachments ("Message") may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information.  If you are not the addressee, or if this Message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute it, and we ask that you please delete it (including all copies) and notify the sender by return email.  Delivery of this Message to any person other than the intended recipient(s) shall not be deemed a waiver of confidentiality and/or a privilege.
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20090903/6a30d487/attachment.html>