[asterisk-users] Is this failed Asterisk setup typical?

[John Novack]

Do you really expect an unbiased response from this community?

Seems to me a similar argument for and against hosting ones own web 
presence in house with mixed results .  Others choose to use a 
datacenter service, seldom but sometimes with poor results.

Placing  ones business lifeline in the hands of a telephony amateur, one 
has to question management decisions. Placing ones telephony onto "any 
old server" certainly isn't wise either.

Certainly these days many have come to expect less than 99.999% from 
their telephones, even with providers that have been around more than 
100 years.
A sad situation indeed.

John Novack


Gilles wrote:
> Hello
>
> 	I just read this article and would like some feedback from
> experienced Asterisk users:
>
> ===============
> "Failed open source VoIP deployment leads to hosted VoIP strategy" By
> Jessica Scarpati
>
> "When budgets are crimped, open source voice over IP (VoIP) solutions
> look attractive -- a little extra work for a lower cap-ex. But those
> savings came at a high price for one Texas company, which -- after
> years of struggling and failing to tame open source VoIP -- opted for
> a hosted VoIP service from a local service provider.
>
> [...] To harness the power of Asterisk and exploit the platform's near
> boundless capabilities, you must have the in-house expertise to do so,
> or at least bring in a well-vetted Asterisk consultant.
>
> [...] CuDerm employees frequently collaborate with colleagues at two
> partner companies while developing marketing campaigns for cosmetic
> products. Three years ago, the company recognized that this frequent
> collaboration would be more productive with direct inward dialing
> (DID), DeRudder said, because users were spending too much time
> retrieving and relaying individual phone numbers for incoming and
> outgoing calls. [...] It wasn't until CuDerm adopted a hosted VoIP
> service from Cypress Communications, an Atlanta-based service provider
> specializing in hosted VoIP for small to medium-sized businesses
> (SMBs), that simple conveniences such as call transfers became a
> reality.
>
> [...] Looking to reap the cost benefits of VoIP but avoid the expense
> of buying and maintaining an IP-based private branch exchange (IP
> PBX), DeRudder chose the open source VoIP project Asterisk. He chose
> Asterisk because it required a custom-built server but no other
> dedicated hardware for the phone system. The system was a perpetual
> headache, DeRudder said. Bandwidth maxed out, users complained of
> dropped calls and the main driver for the system, DID, never worked.
>
> [...] Enterprises and SMBs sometimes overlook bandwidth needs and let
> them take a backseat to cost savings in a hosted VoIP service, causing
> call quality to suffer, Whelan said. Service providers may also offer
> compression to squeeze more simultaneous calls in the pipe, but that
> too can damage call quality, she added."
>
> http://searchunifiedcommunications.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid186_gci1508323_mem1,00.html
> (free registration required)
> ===============
>
> So it looks like this company had the following issues:
> * No in-house technical expertise to set up and maintain Asterisk
> * Not enough bandwidth
> * DID module apparently not reliable
>
> Based on your experience, are those problems typical?
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2914 - Release Date: 06/02/10 14:25:00
>
>   

-- 
Dog is my co-pilot