<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Thanks for the replys. I'm
convinced. PRI it is. </font><br>
<br>
Peter Svensson wrote:
<blockquote
cite="midPine.LNX.4.44.0509060006250.32224-100000@cheetah.psv.nu"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Ben Brown wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">So the only difference with PRI is caller ID? What I am trying to
determine is if the PRI has enough advantages to give up the voice
channel used by the D channel. For what I am doing, caller ID is not
necessarily that important for my application.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
The PRI signalling is more robust than any of the alternatives (except
SS7). Call setup is faster, you can get DID, caller id and much better
error reporting from the pstn.
I would recommend against CAS or analoge connectes whenever isdn is
available.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Can Asterisk choose the context based upon the CallerID with a PRI?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Yes, this can be acclomplished in the dialplan.
Peter
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com --
Asterisk-Users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com">Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users</a>
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>