I would however be interested in knowing how these USB channel banks work out in a extremely large environment. Cost/Reliability and management wise.Keep in mind that grandstream now has a 24 port FXS gateway which retails for $700- and their newer 8 port gateways are extremely good.
Quoting Steve Totaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Tzafrir Cohen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 03:00:03PM -0500, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: >> > On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 02:14:57AM +0200, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: >> > > > >> http://www.voipon.co.uk/xorcom-astribank32-32-fxs-channel-bank-p-530.html >> > > > >> > > > Trouble is, you'll need 7 32-port units to cover your needs >> and I'm not >> > > > sure if USB2 is up to driving that many ... Tzafrir? >> > > >> > > One USB connector can take a number close to that easily. But even if >> > > USB were the bottleneck, you would just add another USB controller in >> > > the form of PCI card and get extra bandwidth. >> > >> > Is there any reason you'd want to do that on a system of that scale >> > instead of just using Ethernetted FXS boxes on a dedicated 100Base? >> > >> > Even if you didn't want to use reinvite, seems you'd still win just >> > from the less expensive host interface (I can't understand people using >> > T-1 interfaces for FXS channels either, honestly, in the current >> > environment). >> >> USB is very cheap. It's in every computer. A dedicated ethernet segment >> costs more to set up that an extra USB segment (a 10$ for an extra USB >> controller? 20$ for a USB hub? a bit more for the wiring?). >> >> TDMoE is more complicated as the latency is higher and the jitter is >> larger. >> >> >> Now both thing have been (T1 channel banks, and TDMoE) have been done by >> others. People do use and buy them. I don't intend to say that they >> don't. But ours does as well :-) >> >> >> -- >> Tzafrir Cohen >> icq#16849755 jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> +972-50-7952406 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://www.xorcom.com iax:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/tzafrir >> > > Ethernet/SIP is going to be by far the most flexible. > > You can have much longer cable runs without some kind of USB repeater > device. Switches are cheap, CAT5/6 is cheap. > > You could put a Quintum Tenor AX 48 Port (for instance) in one section > of a building, campus, LAN (WAN if you are daring) and the server > could be anywhere, not tied by 15 or 30 foot USB cables. Then if you > are doing new wiring, you can run the shortest distance from the > location of the SIP FXS device to the phones. > > You can have redundant, self healing links as well as link aggregation. > > I cannot see how TDMoE or USB come anywhere close to this flexibility > and certainly don't see it being a fit for high port densities like > discussed. > > I see TDM0E as something that a tech guy thought would be cool (and it > is but not very practical) and a USB device something suited for the > SoHo (but missing the scalability, redundancy, and flexibility that IP > gives.) > > Thanks, > Steve Totaro > > _______________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > > -- Faraz R Khan Chief Architect Emergen Consulting Pvt Ltd www.emergen.biz _______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
