<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- <br>
Hash: SHA1 <br>
<br>
On 1/4/2013 2:29 PM, Carlos Alvarez wrote:<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 12:12
PM, Simon Woodhead<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:simon.woodhead@simwood.com"><simon.woodhead@simwood.com></a>wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Then there's the switches. Are they switches or are they
hubs? If hubs,<br>
>> forget it. If switches, are they supporting full duplex
or are you looking<br>
>> at 5Mb each way? Managed or unmanaged - I'd suspect
unmanaged in which case<br>
>> you're not going to be able to do a dedicated voice VLAN
or manage QoS.<br>
>> That all points to jitter of varying degrees given either
congestion or<br>
>> simple serialisation delay.<br>
>><br>
><br>
> I was careful to specify it would be a switched network. We'd
be putting<br>
> in new switches. The cabling is likely old, and was used with
a standard<br>
> PBX previously.<br>
><br>
> My question was really about experience, not theory, and some
of you shared<br>
> some very useful stuff. I know in theory it "should" work,
and I know old<br>
> cabling can have myriad problems. Reality often works out
very different<br>
> from theory. In all likelihood, if we took this route, it
would have a<br>
> contractual caveat that problems may be blamed on the cabling
and they'd<br>
> have to swap it out.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> VoiceOps mailing list<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org">VoiceOps@voiceops.org</a><br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops</a></span><br>
<br>
<br>
I'll second a previous comment about hard-coding speed/duplex to
10Mbps. While it goes against the grain (or should) for most data
folks to not use auto-negotiation, this is a case where you might
run into trouble if you leave it on. I have experience reusing "old"
CAT3 for switched ethernet (some installed for voice, some for data
networking). The end devices will try (and is some cases may
succeed) to negotiation 100Mbps; it caused nothing but trouble.
Hard coded everything to 10M and things stabilized. A few of the
more savvy users questioned us, but we explained the situation.<br>
<br>
Good luck.<br>
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
<br>
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.enigmail.net/">http://www.enigmail.net/</a>
<br>
<br>
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQ5zNNAAoJEBxhAh+LWUKiEPYH/1xBNwIPK45KzxR+qVb5/1ZG
<br>
TbsSpBqDAwZJo8mJc/UB0kPXnl1f5SOko5erQLC3/wUlCqhbcL4WUdhbHuBIQJYO
<br>
u1/AV/+/avu/gd5cKQ1EknoutLNXNBvCiYPuuz4awE8bAgkMMz3kWnpASPemQxxw
<br>
omMn0dnedpmIidfBIRsyxClfZYVeCdBM3JhMrl8siFa9aYmmRHYeS+Cv6uws4Arh
<br>
2K17z8BjhDbQaYXXHyGLNZoNz0VYSEKxk5iZkC4d48msdxyPHk6YmYqw6ETJsc38
<br>
DDq3gGARVRDgWHTKD2ckT6qOIbCEgrc8czkNdt5lZAo3wFzlTau/c0x4P4OcPSo=
<br>
=zj5A
<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>