Re: alternative to voip gateways

[Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>]

"Acceptable" 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Baldur Norddahl" <baldur.norddahl () gmail com> 
To: nanog () nanog org 
Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 3:57:35 PM 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 



That probably depends on your country. Here nothing less than 100 Mbps is acceptable :-). Just pointing out that is not 
actually possible without rebuilding. 


To his original query I would suggest simply using CPEs with VoIP ports and skip analog voice. 


Regards, 


Baldur 




On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 10:03 PM Mel Beckman < mel () beckman org > wrote: 




Baldur, 


According to Nick Edwards, the OP, the main application is voice, which most any DSLAM will handle easily, and solve 
his IP PBX line consolidation problem. Instead of physical lines into the PBX, he can use the integrated DSLAM SIP 
calling capability as the IP PBX interface. Given that only some of the 1700 lines will be in use simultaneously, that 
amounts to very little bandwidth. 


Data capacity of 10 or 20 Mbps in this environment would be pure gravy, and 100 Mbps is almost certainly not expected, 
or needed, for "worker huts". I'm assuming the workers are not all tele-surgeons .🙂 



-mel 



From: NANOG < nanog-bounces () nanog org > on behalf of Baldur Norddahl < baldur.norddahl () gmail com > 
Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 12:55 PM 
To: nanog () nanog org < nanog () nanog org > 
Subject: Re: alternative to voip gateways 







On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:05 PM Brandon Martin < lists.nanog () monmotha net > wrote: 

<blockquote>
On 5/7/20 12:03 PM, Mel Beckman wrote: 
> In the OP’s case however, the copper plant is private, and wholly owned and already in operation. So surely in that 
> situation fiber would be much more expensive to dig and trench. 

Indeed, I was responding to Ohta's comments regarding copper vs. fiber. In this case, using DSL over the existing plant 
seems like a slam dunk unless very high speeds are needed or the plant is in very poor condition. Modern VDSL/2 DSLAMs 
are relatively inexpensive and will push 100Mbps over surprising distances with essentially seamless fallback to ADSL2+ 
at ~24Mbps for long-reach situations. 
-- 





Actually we are told the distances are between 300 meters and 1600 meters. 1700 loops all from a single point. That is 
going to suck. There will be no vectoring and VDSL speeds starts to drop fast after 500 meters. There is going to be a 
ton of crosstalk. 


If you want to deliver 100 Mbps you will need to rebuild the copper plant such that you isolate bundles of 192 loops in 
nearby cabinets. You need to build fiber and power out there. You need to invest in multiple decentral DSLAMs. 


Regards, 


Baldur 



</blockquote>