PRI over IP
-
@jt1001001 said in PRI over IP:
You can do this yourself with any sip trunk and hardware to convert to PRI. We use AdTran TOTAL Access 900e series for this as do some carriers.
This is what the current provider is offering.
-
Having used a PRI some years back with a MITEL system-
I wouldnt today- though the Exec Dir was a tight wad on technology, it was a nonProfit.Having worked with Emergency services, we took analog Calls from 8 counties and 100miles away (not that distance matters) converted them to SIP and sent them back for 911.
EDIT:
No real sense In using a PRI any longer-Typed on a mobile device.
-
-
@JasGot said in PRI over IP:
@gjacobse said in PRI over IP:
No real since I’m using a PRI any longer-
Can you restate this?
Corrected- stupid phone auto correct.
-
@JasGot said in PRI over IP:
@jt1001001 said in PRI over IP:
You can do this yourself with any sip trunk and hardware to convert to PRI. We use AdTran TOTAL Access 900e series for this as do some carriers.
This is what the current provider is offering.
That's all anyone offers, it's the only realistic means of offering this today.
-
@Dashrender said in PRI over IP:
Scott has apparently personally had super bad experiences with many local telcos for decades.
Anyone who works in telephony has. It's the natural of it, it's a very risky service that has huge outages spread very far apart.
-
@Dashrender said in PRI over IP:
I have to assume it was PRIoIP because I can't believe that Cox ever put in real PRI equipment.
You would know because a real PRI has to have a T1 to delivery it. No T1, no PRI.
-
@Dashrender said in PRI over IP:
The main thing we really need to consider now is how this new SIP is delivered, and how reliable is it?
We had the Cox PRI delivered over their high end fiber, they had some SBC issues that caused some downtime, but then, so could anyone.No, you had SIP and are moving to SIP. You are just moving from an unreliable SIP that was designed to be riskier than necessary to one that doesn't have same risk.
Don't call it PRI when it isn't. Real PRI and what is sold by hucksters today as PRI aren't the same technology, at all. Today it is all SIP. You just either get straight SIP for enterprise, or you get SIP that unnecessarily needs special, high cost equipment to make it look like it is PRI.
You have to have more reliability concerns with PRI today than straight SIP because PRI includes any and all risks of SIP, plus the two totally unnecessary pieces of hardware and data conversion to go through SIP.
-
Worth noting that PRI can't carry modern phone audio quality or video. Features that are just considered expected and unquestioned today - high def audio and video, are just trimmed out by definition when using a PRI. It's audio only, and only with the poor quality g.711u codec. There's no opportunity for improved audio, adaptive handling of connection issues, or passing other data.
-
@scottalanmiller said in PRI over IP:
Worth noting that PRI can't carry modern phone audio quality or video. Features that are just considered expected and unquestioned today - high def audio and video, are just trimmed out by definition when using a PRI. It's audio only, and only with the poor quality g.711u codec. There's no opportunity for improved audio, adaptive handling of connection issues, or passing other data.
I think you're overselling this audio quality thing. Are there those that notice and care - of course, just like there are people who are willing to pay $1000's or more per speaker plus $1000's or more for tube amplifiers for music. But the reality is that normals don't care about that nearly as much. Does it sound like mr roboto? no, then it's likely good enough.
-
@Dashrender said in PRI over IP:
@scottalanmiller said in PRI over IP:
Worth noting that PRI can't carry modern phone audio quality or video. Features that are just considered expected and unquestioned today - high def audio and video, are just trimmed out by definition when using a PRI. It's audio only, and only with the poor quality g.711u codec. There's no opportunity for improved audio, adaptive handling of connection issues, or passing other data.
I think you're overselling this audio quality thing. Are there those that notice and care - of course, just like there are people who are willing to pay $1000's or more per speaker plus $1000's or more for tube amplifiers for music. But the reality is that normals don't care about that nearly as much. Does it sound like mr roboto? no, then it's likely good enough.
I think you overlook the unstated value of what people are starting to get used to. They don't necessarily vocalize or realize what it is that is wrong, it's just.... not right. People can tell when you use a cell phone but they rarely comment on it. Yet everyone hears it and knows instantly you aren't on a high quality line. Just like when you see 24p content on your TV, everyone senses that it looks wrong, but it's not the kind of thing "normals" as you put it, can describe accurately. But just because people can't tell you why they aren't as happy with something, or it sounds antiquated, cheap, or poorly managed, they still sense it.
-
@Dashrender said in PRI over IP:
no, then it's likely good enough.
This sums it up. That's like "it goes down from time to time, but not enough for people to complain". "Good enough" is a way of saying "noticeably not as good, but not so bad as to not be considered."
In IT, good enough is normally what we say when we know something's wrong - when we know something isn't good, it's just not quite so bad as to be bad. And like IT, in real life, no one truly wants food that only edible, they actually prefer what is good. And a company that only provides "good enough" consistently, starts to be sensed as a failure.
Think about yourself as an employee.... are you proud of where you work and the decisions that they make? If so, do you ever feel that way when you also say that the decisions are "good enough?" Of course not, it's what we say when no one's truly happy with it.
