[VoiceOps] Transnexus LCR
anorexicpoodle at gmail.com
Fri May 7 00:06:12 EDT 2010
Depending on what your subscriber distribution is like that could work;
so if for example you can partition users on softswitches in contiguous
number blocks that would be fairly straight forward, but in
contemplating that model myself it would make TransNexus an additional
provisioning touchpoint and because the way the engine calculates
breakouts that can be an exceptionally slow process, we had to rule it
out. For example, we are 5 providers deep for routes across the entire
US, both inter and intra state, and 4 providers deep for routes to all
international destinations with some custom logic handling toll-free etc
and that has left us with a routing table of approximately 6 million
entries in the solution. It isn't uncommon for a new rate deck upload to
take 6+ hours due to the time it takes to re-calculate the new routing
tables. Obviously this isn't something you want to wait around for when
provisioning new users.
I think if you are looking for something to fill a class 4 role for
inter softswitch routing then using acme + ENUM, would be a perfect fit,
or just OpenSIPS as a redirect server, since both scenarios are
extremely lightweight from a provisioning perspective and lend
themselves well to automation.
Feel free to respond to me off list if you want to discuss our
experiences in more detail.
On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 10:56 +0930, Peter Childs wrote:
> So from looking at the website it looks like you could use OpenSIPS+OSPrey as a 'Class 4 Softswitch' or tandem switch... so you could place it somewhere in your core with your class-5 softswitches around the edge???
> Hence all your 'off-net' routing/carrier-billing is done in your 'Class 4' and your 'Class 5's end up with some simplistic tables... (?)
> On 07/05/2010, at 3:30 AM, Scott Berkman wrote:
> > We also use TransNexus for CDR and are very happy with the product and support. They are local to us and we have a very good relationship with them.
> > One of the best things about them is their flexibility and willingness to develop the system(s) to add functions you need if they see it as a benefit to their overall offerings.
> > If you have any more specific questions feel free to contact me off list.
> > -Scott
> > From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of anorexicpoodle
> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 1:03 PM
> > To: Tim Donahue
> > Cc: voiceops at voiceops.org
> > Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Transnexus LCR
> > I am running both and have been for years.
> > AcmePacket is the leader in the SBC market for a good reason, their product is IMO the best out there, and their TAC and SE team has always been a pleasure to work with.
> > TransNexus is a solid product and is about the best solution I have found for gracefully handling routing tables of staggering size, additionally they have a fantastic team over there and are always a pleasure to work with.
> > Really, and this is pretty unusual, i don't have any serious negative criticism about either product or the total solution.
> > Good luck
> > -Ryan
> > On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 11:56 -0400, Tim Donahue wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > We are looking LCR packages to deploy as we plan the replacement our existing Netrake SBCs. The current front-runner for the replacement SBC is AcmePacket.
> > We found the LCR software from Transnexus, which according to their website, should be able to work with both our existing infrastructure and our future upgrade. I was wondering if anyone has any experience (good, bad or other) with Transnexus LCR or SDReporter packages they would be willing to share (on or off-list relpies are welcome) with us.
> > Tim
> > _______________________________________________
> > VoiceOps mailing list
> > VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> > <ATT00001..txt>
More information about the VoiceOps