[Asterisk-Users] IAXy - anyone using them yet?

[Kristian Kielhofner]

Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 14:51:07 -0500, Kristian Kielhofner <kris at krisk.org> wrote:
> 
>>        I understand that, but if Digium (and us) are ever going to see IAX
>>(and IAX devices) become a success, they have to at least be on par
>>(feature wise) with the SIP devices.
> 
> 
> I disagree with that.
> 
> I do believe that IAX will continue to become more and more widespread
> and go mainstream, perhaps even become a serious contender for the
> No.1 spot.
> 
> However, the IAXy is only a small part of the IAX ecosystem, that is
> to say, it is not on its own going to decide the success of IAX.
> 
> I totally agree that incompatibilities with any major networking
> equipment, Cisco or otherwise, is a problem that needs to be fixed and
> I am confident that Digium share this view and that they are working
> on resolving this problem.
> 
> I also agree that not having DNS is a disadvantage serious enough to
> warrant looking for ways how it could be added in future releases. It
> is however understandable that Digium won't jump on such a commitment
> right away because it will most likely require a hardware redesign.
> Implementing a DNS resolver within the constraint of the device as it
> is would seem somewhat impossible.
> 
> As for any other features mentioned, I disagree that they are
> necessary to successfully compete against other ATAs.
> 
> I would see the bulky power supply as a far bigger stumbling block
> because it neutralises the otherwise advantageous small size of the
> IAXy, especially when targeting users who would like to use it as a
> VoIP travel adaptor, a target group that will most appreciate IAX' NAT
> friendliness and against-all-odds-robustness especially if they
> venture outside of the US.
> 
> 
>>"little guys" usually have to blow away the competition just to make it.
> 
> 
> IAX does blow away the competition by a margin very rarely seen in
> technology, perhaps once in a decade or so: It ranks amongst the first
> transistor, the first integrated circuit, the first micro-processor,
> the GUI, the Newton PDA, Tim Berners Lee's HTTP.
> 
> And that precisely was my point. The IAXy competes on IAX alone and it
> is targeting the market segment which is buying it for IAX alone.
> 
> That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be other ATAs following in
> IAXy's footsteps which introduce more feaures such as multiple ports
> and low bandwidth codecs. Farfon are now taking orders for their IAX
> ATA and that has most if not all the features on your list. It is
> scheduled to ship mid October.
> 
> 
>>  Did I mention that it was more expensive?
> 
> 
> This is probably the most vulnerable point when targeting a wider
> market outside of the Asterisk community.
> 
> I think I speak for the majority if I say that we are generally
> prepared to pay a little premium for Digium products simply because we
> know Digium is giving us Asterisk and will put the revenue to use in a
> way that benefits Asterisk in one way or another.
> 
> This is of course not the case with customer outside of the Asterisk
> community. Since the IAXy's design is a triumph of simplicity, I would
> think that the cost of producing it in large volume should be lower
> than most other ATAs, but then again, Digium won't have the volumes
> that Grandstream or Sipura produce. So it will also come down to
> missing economies of scale.
> 
> 
>>        When I ask which one they would like me to implement for them, can you
>>guess what their reaction usually is?
> 
> 
> It depends on how you explain the situation to them and how much of an
> impact security, firewalls and NAT will have. SIP used outside of a
> LAN is a security hazard and there is no proper solution to traverse
> NAT, only workarounds, many of which are problematic in terms of
> security and most of which are support intensive. SIP is a very
> expensive protocol unless you want to restrict your choice of
> equipment and give up flexibility or security. If you are prepared to
> do that, then it is still an expensive protocol. Most certainly it is
> an inconvenient protocol.
> 
> rgds
> benjk
> 

Benjamin,

	I feel that in this whole discussion some points may have been lost, 
but your last mail reinforces what my orignal post was trying to say:

	I would LOVE the iAXY if it worked with my Cisco switches and had DNS 
support.  If Digium were to work these two issues out, I would be buying 
iAXY's instead of Sipura's, because I believe in Digium and I believe in 
IAX2.  But right now, the iAXYs' using IAX2 does not outweigh the 
problems I see with the two issues that I have been talking about this 
whole time.

	I have enjoyed receiving everyone's input on this issue and I hope that 
someone at Digium will see this thread.

P.S.  Radio Shack sells a 9V switching power supply that can work with 
the iAXY for about $25.  It is 1/3 the size of the Digium one and weighs 
practically nothing.  If you are traveling you may want to look at it 
(It is 110/220 auto switching as well).  I bought one for my iAXY (but 
kept it after I sent the iAXY back).  It is now doing a good job 
powering my PCEngines WRAP machine.

--
Kristian Kielhofner