<div dir="ltr">All,<br>Forgot to mention that, we can even do that load balancing and failover client asterisk servers too. <br>If anyone interested in setting up test account and would like to test our service, please let me know. <br>
<br>Thank you,<br>-Jai<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 11:05 AM, Jai Rangi <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jprangi@gmail.com">jprangi@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="ltr">Trixter,<br>Thank you for your comments, <br>We are not dealing with PSTN on our side, we are true VoIP. <br>Re: Bandwidth, we have upto 100mb. Yes we WILL NOT be doing any media on our network which is real bandwidth killer. Re: cpu and and other limits we have built our system on horizontal scalable architecture, fully redundant and load balanced system, that includes firewall, SIP router, Asterisk servers, Database servers etc. <br>
<br>During our crash test, my server was sleeping until 2500 channels. So I am not really worried upto 5000 channels and from there I can easily expand my capacity. Our target is to do the expansion as soon as we reach the 40-50% utilization of the resources. For companies who has more that 200 channels on each DID I think it will be worth for them to deal directly with Lavel3, XO, Quest or Verizon directly. <br>
<br>Yes, I agree that every unlimited has a limit in terms of capacity and resources and we are not exception. But I am positive that we can be good resource for small to mid size businesses. <br><font color="#888888"><br>
-Jai</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Trixter aka Bret McDanel <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:trixter@0xdecafbad.com" target="_blank">trixter@0xdecafbad.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div></div><div>On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 09:47 -0700, Jai Rangi wrote:<br>
> All,<br>
><br>
> I want to take community opinion on this.<br>
> Would there be enough interest if I can offer Unlimited channels, non<br>
> metered DID at $8-$11 (Depending on the volume commitment) per month.<br>
> Target is to sell atleast 10000 DIDs in one to 2 months of time<br>
> frame.<br>
><br>
> Any comment would be appreciated.<br>
><br>
> Thank you,<br>
> -Jai<br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div>I think people would like it, but there would be some apprehension about<br>
it. The pstn carrier has a finite amount of channels available for that<br>
exchange. You only have so much bandwidth, even if you never touched<br>
the media the provider only has so much bandwidth. Then there is the<br>
CDR processing, route processing, etc - cpu resources are finite,<br>
although you can add more just like you can add more pstn and inet<br>
capacity.<br>
<br>
So would $8-11 cover all of those costs and allow you to really do<br>
unlimited service? What if someone ran some application that generated<br>
hundreds of thousands of calls? Or even a few that just did hundreds?<br>
<br>
Granted if you did 10k DIDs at $8 that is $80k/mo. And lets say that<br>
10% did above average traffic of say 150 average channels, that is still<br>
15,000 channels that would have to be maintained give or take (I really<br>
am just pulling numbers out of thin air). You would certainly be able<br>
to afford the cpu and bandwidth costs, which will require more than<br>
1Gbps (I always discount bandwidth both because of atm padding and<br>
because you never want it 100%), but the carrier may not be able to<br>
handle that channel load, and some of the call centers I have seen<br>
traffic on, 150 channels is low, some do thousands at a time, which<br>
would skew that slightly (even though its an average over the top 10%<br>
users).<br>
<br>
In general from what I have seen, most "unlimited" plans have some type<br>
of limit burried somewhere in their user agreement/tos, this is because<br>
capacity is finite and they do not want to go overboard with capacity<br>
and lose money. On a slight tangent, I just wish that carriers who<br>
didnt offer real unlimited would stop advertising it as such, * or not<br>
to indicate some obscure definition of "unlimited"...<br>
<br>
><br>
--<br>
Trixter <a href="http://www.0xdecafbad.com" target="_blank">http://www.0xdecafbad.com</a> Bret McDanel<br>
Belfast +44 28 9099 6461 US +1 516 687 5200<br>
<a href="http://www.trxtel.com" target="_blank">http://www.trxtel.com</a> the phone company that pays you!<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a href="http://www.api-digital.com--" target="_blank">http://www.api-digital.com--</a><br>
<br>
AstriCon 2008 - September 22 - 25 Phoenix, Arizona<br>
Register Now: <a href="http://www.astricon.net" target="_blank">http://www.astricon.net</a><br>
<br>
asterisk-biz mailing list<br>
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:<br>
<a href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz" target="_blank">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>