VOIP Provider: Skyetel
-
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
I'm still not happy with company and their methods. They obviously converted @scottalanmiller by paying him off (advertising here).
They started advertising here after we had already gotten pricing and started to move over to them. They had reached out to talk after I had long conversations with @FATeknollogee and @markjcrane about them and why I should give them a chance.
-
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
Twilio is lower than VoIP.ms.
Not according to the published prices. They are both .0085 to receive, but voip.ms is .01 to send and Twilio is .013.
I'm sure you can get lower with Twilio, but it looks like you have to go to unpublished prices to do it.
-
@scottalanmiller said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
Twilio is lower than VoIP.ms.
Not according to the published prices. They are both .0085 to receive, but voip.ms is .01 to send and Twilio is .013.
I'm sure you can get lower with Twilio, but it looks like you have to go to unpublished prices to do it.
Bzzt wrong. Nice try please play again.
-
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
@scottalanmiller said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
Twilio is lower than VoIP.ms.
Not according to the published prices. They are both .0085 to receive, but voip.ms is .01 to send and Twilio is .013.
I'm sure you can get lower with Twilio, but it looks like you have to go to unpublished prices to do it.
Bzzt wrong. Nice try please play again.
https://www.twilio.com/pricing
https://www.voip.ms/en/rates/united-states
Sorry, .09, not .085 for voip.ms, but Twilio is only "starting" at .085. Twilio lists their lowest rate, voip.ms lists their flat rate. voip.ms is cheaper for sending and DIDs, Twilio starts cheaper for receiving, but is variable.
-
@scottalanmiller said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
Nope still wrong.
@scottalanmiller Can you not be bothered to remember things that you yourself have raved about prior to the current shiny thing?
Programmable Voice is not SIP trunking.
Elastic SIP Trunking would be the correct product.
-
I've never used those numbers before. Those are quite a bit better. We use PV mostly, so those are what we see most of the time. Didn't realize that they were different.
-
@scottalanmiller said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
I've never used those numbers before. Those are quite a bit better. We use PV mostly, so those are what we see most of the time. Didn't realize that they were different.
Bzzzt wrong answer.
https://mangolassi.it/topic/13020/estimating-sip-trunk-costs/10
-
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
@scottalanmiller said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
I've never used those numbers before. Those are quite a bit better. We use PV mostly, so those are what we see most of the time. Didn't realize that they were different.
Bzzzt wrong answer.
https://mangolassi.it/topic/13020/estimating-sip-trunk-costs/10
Ah, it was a drop. I'd forgotten that they had changed it. We've not reevaluated them since then. Especially as Skyetel is still cheaper, and we need voip.ms for some of our markets (non-US they offer really great stuff.) So for normal US SIP trunks, Twilio is quite a bit cheaper than voip.ms, but not quite Skyetel, but public pricing.
-
@scottalanmiller said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
I've never used those numbers before. Those are quite a bit better. We use PV mostly, so those are what we see most of the time. Didn't realize that they were different.
I'm calling bullshit.
You 100% do not use Programmable Voice. That requires use of the API for calling.
You have SIP trunks. You have a post someplace (here or Telegram)where you mentioned you used PJSIP and Asterisk 15.
Edit: Telegram June 19, 2018.
-
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
@scottalanmiller said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
I've never used those numbers before. Those are quite a bit better. We use PV mostly, so those are what we see most of the time. Didn't realize that they were different.
I'm calling bullshit.
You 100% do not use Programmable Voice. That requires use of the API for calling.
Correct, it is called via API from a C# application. That's the largest system that we manage. 100,000 users on the system. The system does automatic call setup, it's essentially a custom, automated, distributed call center. But it's for outbound, not inbound, and not for sales.
We 100% use programmable voice NOT SIP trunking for the vast majority of our Twilio usage. Insane call volume, the cost per month is crazy.
-
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
You have SIP trunks. You have a post someplace (here or Telegram)where you mentioned you used PJSIP and Asterisk 15.
I DO have a few, but the volume is trivial compared to our API Programmable Voice calling. The same company with the PV uses one Twilio trunk for some normal office calling, but it's less than 1% of their total volume. And NTG has a trunk for testing, but we don't use it for normal calling.
-
-
Well then, I stand corrected.
I will add this is not something you have ever hinted at doing I. The past. Not mentioned a setup for (I would like to see that as I have no opportunities to use it yet).
-
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
Well then, I stand corrected.
I will add this is not something you have ever hinted at doing I. The past. Not mentioned a setup for (I would like to see that as I have no opportunities to use it yet).
I only manage the phone bit of it, had nothing to do with the writing of the application. But it is neat what it does. The "users" (employees on our side) need to do a bit of fancy calling on behalf of their customers and the application handles setting everything up. It is quite involved. It has to be anonymous to one side, and has to handle non-voip scenarios on the other. So the application actually calls both parties most of the time. And handles automated recording and data collection and fills in a database with details and a copy of the call to go into a report to the customer.
-
I know this is a bit of an old thread, but....
I had to stand up a 3CX system (on-prem) & was having some connectivity issues between the site's ER-4 & Skyetel!!
Thank god for the "Endpoint Health Status" page on the Skyetel portal.
The support I've gotten from Skyetel has been nothing short of fantastic.
I'll be moving the rest of my stuff from Twilio to Skyetel.
And No, I don't get paid by Skyetel to give fake reviews (for the cynic's out there)Thanks to Chris @Skyetel for the early AM support session & showing me the sngrep tool.
It turns out the ER4 seems to prefer SIP TCP (vs UDP).This post above is just my opinion, YMMV.
-
@FATeknollogee said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
It turns out the ER4 seems to prefer SIP TCP (vs UDP).
That is certainly not true. I would look more at your configuration of things.
-
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
@FATeknollogee said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
It turns out the ER4 seems to prefer SIP TCP (vs UDP).
That is certainly not true. I would look more at your configuration of things.
Again, remember, this is an install with 3CX not FreePBX.
-
@FATeknollogee said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
@JaredBusch said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
@FATeknollogee said in VOIP Provider: Skyetel:
It turns out the ER4 seems to prefer SIP TCP (vs UDP).
That is certainly not true. I would look more at your configuration of things.
Again, remember, this is an install with 3CX not FreePBX.
Not arguing that. But EdgeOS has no preference in packets whatsoever.
Did you turn off the SIP helper?
-
@JaredBusch Yep, disabled SIP ALG before I started the install.
-
FWIW - this issue in particular was probably being caused by the ISP or the Modem, not the edgerouter. We recommended using TCP because it handles ISP NATing better and modems tend to get less confused by it.
While it could have something to do with the edgerouter, we like those routers and they tend to perform well. TCP just tends to be a catch all that fixes a lot of SIP deliverability issues.
