RE: VoIP QOS best practices

["Ray Burkholder" <ray () oneunified net>]

There are many companies with branch offices scattered across the
country who already have data circuits in place.  Why not use those
circuits, which in many cases are data T1's, for sharing both voice and
data?  

Long distance rates are so low now-a-days, it is hard to justify voip
for that reason alone anymore.  But voip on circuits between branch
offices allows the capability of uniform dialling plans, user extension
between branch offices, traffic management, access to messaging systems,
etc, etc.

For corporate communcations, when mixed with other technologies, voip is
a very powerful tool.  And in some contexts, converts in the realm of IP
Telephony.

Ray Burkholder


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Cabe [mailto:tex () dcne net] 
> Sent: February 10, 2003 15:31
> To: Ray Burkholder
> Cc: Charles Youse; Bill Woodcock; nanog () nanog org
> Subject: RE: VoIP QOS best practices
>
>
> Its better to use TDM when trying to share a line anyway. VOIP is only
> practical for a mobile work force.
>
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Ray Burkholder wrote:
>
> > QoS is important on T1 circuits and makes voice higher 
> priority.  Voice
> > can even be done on sub T1 circuits with excellent results.  In this
> > regard, there are some additional packet sizing and fragementation
> > issues to worry about in order to make voice packet timing 
> constant, but
> > nothing impossible to over-come.  There are commonly 
> accepted industry
> > practices for this.  Old hat for many practitioners in the 
> Voip world.
> > Ray Burkholder
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Charles Youse [mailto:cyouse () register com]
> > > Sent: February 10, 2003 14:09
> > > To: Bill Woodcock
> > > Cc: nanog () nanog org
> > > Subject: RE: VoIP QOS best practices
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > My main concern is that some of the sites that will be tied
> > > with VoIP have only T-1 data connectivity, and I don't want a
> > > surge in traffic to degrade the voice quality, or cause
> > > disconnections or what-have-you.  People are more accustomed
> > > to data networks going down; voice networks going down will
> > > make people shout.
> > >
> > > C.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Bill Woodcock [mailto:woody () pch net]
> > > Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 1:05 PM
> > > To: Charles Youse
> > > Cc: nanog () nanog org
> > > Subject: RE: VoIP QOS best practices
> > >
> > >
> > >     > That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense - is it that
> > > QoS doesn't work as advertised?
> > >
> > > That's generally true as well.  But why would you need 
> it?  What's the
> > > advantage to be gained in using QoS to throw away 
> packets, when the
> > > packets don't need to be thrown away?
> > >
> > >     > As someone who is looking to deploy VoIP in the near
> > > future this is of particular interest.
> > >
> > > Go ahead and deploy it.  It's easy and works well.  It
> > > certainly doesn't
> > > need anything like QoS to make it work.
> > >
> > >                                 -Bill