[asterisk-users] Multi-Tenant PBX with Asterisk

[Kannan]

Thanks Leandro for your comments.


On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Leandro Dardini <ldardini at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> 2012/7/30 Kannan <vasdeveloper at gmail.com>
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I came across couple of pointers on the Internet regarding solutions
>> available for providing hosted PBX service.
>>
>> 1. Multiple PBXs: Using separate hardware to host each PBX. Pretty
>> straightforward, but no hosting company wants to use it.
>> 2. Multi-tenant PBX: Configuring multiple PBXs within the same instance
>> of Asterisk. I.e. partitioning a single instance of Asterisk into multiple
>> PBXs by way of configurations, using unique landing context for each tenant.
>> 3. Virtual PBX: Multiple virtual machines within the same hardware, each
>> host an instance of Asterisk.
>>
>> Which one of the method above is generally used by hosted PBX service
>> providers?
>>
>> Isn't the second option with ARA a good choice for dynamic creation of
>> multiple "small" PBX tenants?
>>
>> Is the last option alone or combination of options 2 and 3 good for cloud
>> based hosted PBX service offering?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Kannan.
>>
>
> Working in the voip field from a lots of years, I have found all three
> type of business.
>
> The first is maybe the easier and most common. Hardware is cheap and it is
> easier to "sell" a service like the PBX if it is sold together with a piece
> of iron. Usually the hardware is placed on client's network, using the
> bandwidth of the client. Usually together with the PBX is sold also a
> router/firewall/traffic shaper/vpn endpoint to try to optimize the traffic
> on the client's DSL.
>
> The major pros about this solution is you can use a normal PBX like
> freepbx/trixbox,  the client can mess the config how he likes, without
> disrupting other services, you can install VoIP card to connect landlines,.
>
> The major cons is the cost of the hardware, the cost of the g.729 licenses
> (if any) and the maintenance cost of replacing hardware failures and the
> need to be physically near each client.
>
> The second is the holy grail of the VoIP providers.
>
> The major pros is the cost. Having a single hardware is cheap and it is
> still cheap also if you decide to get two to be ready in case of an
> hardware failure.
>
> The major cons is the software. You cannot use the award winning
> freepbx/trixbox family and you need to deal with sometime limited or
> incomplete developed interfaces. The client always asks for the missing
> feature. One other major cons is the "reload". If the PBX software is not
> made using ARA, then every time you add a new peer or a new DID, you need
> to reload the entire PBX and that is a resource killer. Again, if the pbx
> interface is not made using ARA, then you cannot let your clients to change
> the configuration or they will trigger continuous reload (and delaying
> reload for example every 10 minutes is not a solution)
>
> The last one is sometime the chosen compromise, but from my point of view,
> pbxes are not good software to virtualize. They are too sensible to delays
> and your voice quality can go down if the real server is overloaded.
>
> The same for the cloud based solutions (I have yet to found). I suspect
> the "cloud" is good for services like http, not for real time applications.
>
> Leandro
>
>
> --
> _____________________________________________________________________
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
> New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs:
>                http://www.asterisk.org/hello
>
> asterisk-users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20120731/c05cab7d/attachment.htm>