atcomsystems.ca/forum Forums General General Telephone & Systems Information Why NOT to buy an IP system

Please read:::
This was moved from a Private category to be shared with all who may be interested. Please try to keep your comments to the product and not bash the technical ability of those who work in either environment.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. prospective IP phone system buyer, how often do you have to reboot your Computer Based Network? What makes you think that your IP (Computer Based Network) phone system will be any different. How often must you upgrade your computer/network software? Again, what makes you think the IP (Computer Based Network) phone system will be any different?

Now, how many can come up with other 'like' negative questions?

--------------------
Due to the recession and resultant economic slowdown, the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off until further notice.

While your comments are overall true, there really can be no denying now that VoIP is the future for our industry. Digital technology will be around for a long time still, but it will become what analog systems became 5-10 years ago.

Steve

I have pulled out at least 3 IP systems in the past two months, reasons,,, I had no idea it was going to cost us so much to stay on top of it not to mention the pipe I had to pay out the nose to run it. I shouldn't have listened to the IT manager.

Another reason was ,,,when my IT guy suggested we go VOIP he neglected to tell me we had to upgrade to a POE server and by the time it came to my attention he had already ordered and received the IP system.

I think the biggest problem here is not digital or IP ,it's the fact that they don't bring in a tel tech to get there opinion. As we all know the best system is one that will run digital and IP but these CEO's listen to the IT guy and often end up putting in total IP which can cost a fortune and be a nightmare when they have no idea what they are getting into before hand and the IT guy is way in over his head by then.

Here's one:

When the lights go out, so do the phones.

With analog, you always have a phone up;
With digital and PFT, you always have a phone up.

With IP, you are sitting in the dark trying to get a cell signal.

Here's another:

IP phone guys (i.e. phone guys who have trained on IP) are usually better at troubleshooting a TCP/IP network than the in-house IT guy.

I can't tell you how many times I've had to argue with an IT guy that his network was stopping an IP system from working. Either they close the UDP ports (call goes through and "nails up", but no talk path), or their routers are set to close ports when traffic goes above a preset point (i.e. when the NEC IPS DMR tries to do the second/verify download of its database from the main PBX) (see also "packetstorm"), or they've got a physical layer that stretches through the most remote building, bounces off of a radio link, and then comes back through a dozen choke-points...

FCGs....

Correct Telephoneguy; you nailed it.

IT guys can hardly handle basic port forwarding. Half of them have never heard of it, but most kids with a Xbox know how to do it.

25% of the so-called IT professionals at jobs we do installations at don't know a router from a switch and no, I am not kidding.

At one site at couple weeks ago we had a six-figure salary, every plaque on the wall, very proud IT gal decide to remove their Cisco router and stick their PCs directly on a public switch because she thought the router was 'causing problems.'

I actually had to explain to her what DHCP internal address were and what a router does, why she couldn't just removed it without replacing it with another router.

Management at this company thinks she is the most important person there. Not kidding.

We did a complex voice mail restoration there, billed them, and the vice president asked if there were paying for 'learning time' - did we really know what we were doing, it took a long time, etc. Hard pills to swallow.

We are getting kicked out because she told them to buy a ShoreTel system.

No hard feelings, but I mentioned all their wiring and network infrastructure is from the 80s and they will have issues and lots of unexpected costs. Her response - "we bought it because this system is IP and we need IP for SIP trunks". (Their current system handles SIP).

"IT Professionals" - the most over-hyped, over-paid bunch of wind bags out there. Yes, of course, many IT guys/gals know their stuff, but MOST do not. At least lowly phone guys typically have the knowledge necessary for their trade.

Unfortunately, the perception from the managers that make the decisions is that they are all knowing Gods and we are just the 'Phone guy." The guy that knows what color goes where but that is about it. Anyone can learn our trade in a week or two. Hell, in fact just give them the manual and they can do this kindergarten stuff themselves.

Well said noisycow!!

Dean, Dean, Dean...... I owe you a bunch of beerz.

Lots of people say they like IP phones because the user can unplug one and move it to another location and it still works the same. That is great when you need to move desks that usually requires help to move everything else anyways. When a phone breaks you can't borrow another one without reprogramming. A new phone out of box will require programming before it is usable. Another gripe of mine is you need expensive Cat 5 backbone with QOS, POE switches just to run a phone. Analog and digital are both capable of running on a single twisted pair.

A good, reliable vendor of a digital system will tend to point out options that you DON'T need, thus saving you $$$$, whereas CG's, IT's, etc will do the opposite. Or worse, NOT tell you what you're bound to need to get it working. In the meantime, you're either "SOL" without working phones or getting a huge unexpected invoice in the near future.

This sounds like a political smear campaign. Let’s not talk about our strengths, let’s just talk about their faults.

1. How often do you have to reboot your Computer Based Network? We hardly ever have to reboot any network device. This includes routers, switches, and servers.

2. How often must you upgrade your computer/network software? Aside from security patches there’s not a whole lot of upgrading going on.

3. When the lights go out, so do the phones? Huh????? If a TDM system is installed without any power protection what happens when the lights go out?

4. With analog, you always have a phone up with digital and PFT, you always have a phone up. There’s so many things wrong with this I don’t know where to start. Always have a phone up????? Yes, if the system is properly designed and implemented. Same can be said for any IP system.

5. IP phone guys (i.e. phone guys who have trained on IP) are usually better at troubleshooting a TCP/IP network than the in-house IT guy? This one makes me laugh. Usually better? I might not want to go around using this line too many times because you will eventually be challenged and end up with poo on your face.

6. Another gripe of mine is you need expensive Cat 5 backbone with QOS, POE switches just to run a phone? Most places have some sort of network in place don’t they? You don’t always need QOS and you don’t always need expensive POE switches.

There shouldn’t be a US vs. Them or IP vs. TDM debate. Both TDM and IP have their place and time. If I was quoting an IP system to a customer and any of these arguments was used against me I would love it because it would make my sale so much easier. A customer should be proposed the best SOLUTION for their need. This is going to vary depending on the situation and there’s so many variables that we simply cannot say IP or TDM is the "best". We are their telephone vendor and as such we should know just as much as IP as we do about TDM systems. IP is not going away so grin and bear it. The more time you spend fighting the system the more time you’re spending falling behind. Embrace the technology, educate yourself, and be prepared to make intelligent arguments as to the pros and cons of any system.

Telephone systems are different from data networks in one very important way; User Experience.

When you configure a telephone system, everything is driven by the user experience. Someone who primarily deals with telephone systems will consult with the user to find out what their needs are. You also need to anticipate their needs based on experience and keep them on the right path. Anything that you change is going to have some impact on the user experience. You don't make changes simply because it suits your fancy or because you want to play with a new technology. You don't swap one type of phone for another just because it's easier for you to manage the phones without considering the needs of the user.

People who manage networks are often more concerned with the technologies they manage and much less so with the user experience. You can change your routing or replace your Baystack switch with a Cisco switch without your users noticing anything.

As a phone installer you do what's right for the end users. The IT guy will often do what's right for the network. Funny thing about that, the network doesn't care.

It isn't always about the technology, it's about the philosophy of the person managing that technology. There are plenty of IT people who are very concerned about the user experience, and their role in enabling users to do their jobs. There are some IT people who act like the network is the most important thing in the company and the users should feel lucky that they get to use it at all.

Though I'm not down on VoIP systems, two selling points against traditional TDM that I can't make sense of are:

1) "You mean to tell me that the Merlin 410/820 requires you to use eight conductor wiring? When will AT&T get with the program and support phones over a single pair?" Of course nobody today cares how many pairs a POE IP phone requires.

2) "You mean to tell me that having two autonomous networks--one for voice and one for data--makes any sense?" Meanwhile, cabling for new buildings almost always includes at least two C5e runs...one for voice and one for data (though technically they're the same). And how many times do you see each side of the house go through two distinct switches "to better manage traffic"?

Things that make you go "Hmmmmm".

I'd like to address these points if I may...

3. NEC systems are built to accept off-the-shelf batteries for keeping the system up and running during a brief power outage. I have one hotel with a car battery powering their backup power (installed using NEC-supplied connectors). Bet it stays up longer than the UPS on a Cisco system lasts... Also... Got analog CO trunks on those pure IP systems, or do they turn into expensive intercoms while the power's out?

4. I have yet to see an IP system with PFT. Would you care to name one and provide a link, please? Avaya Partner has PFT built-in, for example, and most other TDM systems allow PFT.

5. Yes, usually better. You tell me how many times you've explained to a Phone Guy that the phones don't work because the UDP port's not open, and I'll match it with how many times I've explained it to the FCGs. And let's add a bonus for each time that they said, "What's UDP?"

6. Sure, you slap the Phone system onto the existing network with no POE and no QOS. Then gently explain to the customer who just paid through the nose for this system why:

... A. You can only provide a limited number of phones, with limited features, because there's not enough power for more or better phones... Or else why you have to have a wall wart and a power cord going into each phone... (didn't people used to B*tch about that on Nortel?)
... B. The system has huge amounts of latency and voice sounds choppy as hell, or echoes like he's in an oil drum, or else the guy across the room's lips move five seconds before he speaks like in a badly dubbed movie...
... C. The phone connections bounce up and down when Phil in Accounting streams a funny You-Tube clip... And then shows it to everyone in Accounting...

BTW, this should demonstrate item 5, as well. I can understand that a CG might not realize how QOS works or how important it is to a clear voice connection, but for a TDM phone guy trained on IP, not understanding latency is nearly unforgivable.

Yes, we need to embrace VoIP and yes, it's the wave of the future. But it needs to be driven by the Phone industry, not the computer industry.

Otherwise, the CG who just got his 6-month Diploma from We-Make-A+-Experts School of Technology will always be over his head and spouting jargon he doesn't understand while he screws up a working voice system.

The only thing I'll say about all this is I've seen many pure IP systems removed because they didn't perform as expected. Can't say that about traditional phone systems.

If you have use for off prem IP phones most new systems will do this, keep it conventional with-in your four walls. You'll get the best of both worlds this way.

Implied here and specifically spelled out by Clinton is the notion of customer service. Having worked on both sides of the fence, I personally have no problem characterizing IT people as being so horribly egocentric about their hardware that it often becomes their focus. I can't tell you the number of times I've seen IT/MIS people blow off a day's worth of support calls while concentrating on getting the newest "Cisco flip-flop macro mini module doohickey with pretty blue lights" to work just the way they want it.

And while I also see phone guys as being so proud and brand loyal that the attitude can border on egotistical (I'm guilty as well), I dare say that the only time a phone guy pulls an all-nighter is to GET A CUSTOMER UP. And while a project like that MAY involve fussy hardware, the goal and the focus will, and has always been, the customer...never the equipment.

If phone systems could be tuned up to optimize our video gaming experience, things may have turned out differently.

Telephone Guy,
I was refuting the general points made and not discussing specifics or manufacturers. We can discuss specifics for months here.

3. If a system is not installed with adequate power protection it won’t matter if its a TDM system or an IP system they will both shut off.
"Got analog CO trunks on those pure IP systems, or do they turn into expensive intercoms while the power's out?" Not sure if I follow you here. Even if you have a PRI it will function with the power off so what do you mean here? If you’re thinking about IP trunks then again were back to the power protection issue. If you have backup power you’ll be fine. Its pretty straightforward.

4. Again with specifics. Do all TDM systems have PFT? No they don’t. Were back to implementation. If the customer says "I need PFT" then you provide them a product that will do it. Even if a system does not have built in PFT its not hard to install jacks on the COs and have a few multiline phones on hand for backup.

5. I’ve had to ask IT guys all the time to open up ports for our phones. I never thought they were idiots for not knowing that. Are they supposed to somehow magically know what ports need to be opened and why? Does that mean a telephone guy who has to call support is an idiot for not knowing everything about their system?

6. Again were back to implementation. My point was simply this. You don’t ALWAYS have to have POE switches and if you do they don’t ALWAYS have to be expensive.

Justbill, We’ve pulled out TDM systems because the customer was not happy with it. It all falls back on the customer’s expectations and what he or she was told they were getting. It happens all the time with both TDM and IP systems.

My gripe with some of the posts is that you can’t just generalize and say IP is better or TDM is better because that’s not the way it works. You provide a solution for a customer’s needs plain and simple. Sometime IP is the right way to go and sometime TDM is the right way to go and sometimes a hybrid setup may be called for. The IP products have their place and you can’t discard them because Joe Blow didn’t know how to install it. We don’t quote IP for everything and we don’t quote TDM for everything. It all depends on the customer's needs.

No great words of wisdom here, just some random thoughts:

My recent foray into VoIP has been an eye opener. What has floored me is the cost. Doing VoIP right is really expensive. Way more than TDM by a huge margin. From that aspect alone it should be the main consideration in the final decision. Unfortunately, we are seeing the big vendors moving away from TDM and at best developing some fancy hybrid systems that still revolve around VoIP. Plus, VoIP is an amazingly easy sell despite the fact that installing and keeping one running smoothly is way more expensive and technologically challenging than any TDM system I know. It's all about villifying the PG. Sound familiar? I know of a lot of businesses who would be an easy sell for an expensive VoIP system if just to jettison their PG who they feel is more of a sorcerer than a technician.

At this time VoIP is much more expensive to install and maintain. All that said, do we really have much of a choice? I mean it's all going VoIP. Avaya no longer has a TDM offering for example. Ditto many others. So is this really just a moot discussion?

At one time in this country we had arguments of whether whale oil was better than natural gas. There is no stopping technology. Like it or not VoIP is here to stay. I'm not digging it so much to be honest. And I am a CG guy. I am wary of getting in deep with VoIP until I can guarantee the same quality of service as I can with a TDM.

The bulk of my experience has been with traditional telephony. I posted this back in 2006. Not much has changed. Since then I can't think of any major issues since the initial problems experienced and addressed. As an end user the IP service has been satisfactory. There are still some issues such as the ability to forward only the line on button #1.

A few months ago I asked some questions about Cisco VOIP versus a standard phone system. The decision had already been made to go with Cisco. I wasn’t a part of the decision. Basically I was an end user.
Someone had asked that I get back to the forum once we cut to the new system. That happened about 3 weeks ago. Below are my thoughts as an end user and as someone with 30 plus years in the telephone business.
Ø Thus far the system seems to meet most of the needs of the business. I can’t speak about the initial or recurring costs since I’m not in that part of the business.
Ø It was different to see someone come in and plug the phone into the data network. No wirework to do, everything was plug and play.
Ø In a previous job I was exposed very briefly to the Call Manager and I had the chance to do some provisioning in a small demo system. My exposure was limited. All I can say is that the terminology used to build extensions, routes, etc. was different from typical telephone terminology. Once you got past that it did not seem that difficult to work in. Again, my exposure was limited.
Ø The actual phones seem functional. I saw and used some Cisco phones about a year and a half ago. The instruments that were installed for our new system were much superior to them. They were comparable to phones on other systems that I have used.
Ø We did experience echo at times on calls in and out of the PSTN. This appears to have been fixed by a software upgrade to the Call Manager. (As I was typing this someone in the office just had an echo problem on an internal call. Maybe there is still a problem.)
Ø You can only forward the line or extension that appears on button one of the phone. This has caused a problem. We’re looking for a “work around”.
Ø My main problem with the whole process was the lack of testing by the vendor and by the division responsible for the phone system. Too much trust was put on the “plug and play”. I wasn’t brought up that way. The instruments were on the desks for a month prior to cutover. They were functional for calls to the PSTN and you could make and receive calls within the system. I did testing on my division’s lines. I uncovered several problems that would have had a major negative impact not just on my division but also on the whole organization. Things like Auto Attendants not being set up. There were problems with the number of incoming calls allowed per extension being incorrect. The same was true with total number of calls allowed per extension. There were extensions that weren’t set up to forward to voice mail. These were things that the people responsible for the job should have been picked up by testing. The end user should not have had to find them by testing.

This is why you should read the book I am writing.

Its for you guys.

My book will explain that all this jibberish is for the most part absolutely true...what are ya gonna do about it?

Hybrid=The neo phone guy that is responsible for the evolution of field engineering success.

You guys fail to see how valuable your perspective is.

WE are the answer.
WE are the ones with the perspective the companies need to succeed with their clients.

dtmf and dagwood nailed it.

Dont you see that becoming the IT guy is the solution?

Everything you have said should make you realize the truth in what I have been saying all along.

Its easier for the phone guy to become the IT guy than the other way around.

My book will at least make you think about it.
I even lay out a few scenarios and methods.
I describe my path in relative detail illustrating decisions that had to be made without all the data. (No pun intended)

YOU guys are the future if you embrace it.
YOU guys will be the elite in the future if you will be a part of it.

YOU would never do the stupid things the data guy does.

Besides...there is a whole chapter on what the IT guy does and like many of you, I dont want to go deep in their world and I already know that i dont have to to know what they know.

Its not a slam on them.
Its the truth.

Read PMCOOK above again.

Here is what i think.

Voip is more expensive no doubt.
Customers are going to buy it anyway.

If not from you then some data guy turned voice guy.

If you were the voip guy...they would buy from you because you by default have much more telphony knowledge than the data guy.

With higher prices comes higher margins now and on MACS.

We know that math doesnt always hold true.
The long run it will as you get better.

You can OFFER both TDM and VOIP.

You have no need to argue the points because you do so based on knowledge which is your advantage.

This is just high level but you get my drift.

The money is bigger yet you require 50% or more up front anyway. I use to do 75% up front.

Adjust everything based on dollar amount.

Its really deeper than this but the average interconnect owner needs position in todays marketplace and that is in my opinion, seller of both TDM and VoIP.

Since biz isnt what it use to be...learn VoIP.

My book will provide many paths and insights.

Im not a know it all.

Im well on my way to going from a barely fluent in data trad phone guy to infiltrating the elite data guys world.

It isnt without sacrifice.
I have been bleeding for a year.
My wife is owed so much it isnt funny.

There's a lot of painting with a broad brush going on here. Not all (or even most) computer guys are idiots or egomaniacs.

I'll say this much, having installed a Shoretel system just over two years ago, my user's really like it. I know because I've asked them about it. I did a bit of research into various IP and TDM systems when I was looking and found the Shoretel to fit my company's needs, though I will say it was expensive to setup properly (though not nearly as expensive as Cisco).

I happened to be moving offices at the time, so we needed a new network infrastructure anyway. We do have Cisco PoE switches installed with multiple fiber backbone switches to mitigate a single point of failure. This was an expensive option to be sure, but something we were investing in anyway. I am pretty proficient at networking in general, but did hire on a Cisco consultant to setup the VLAN, QoS, etc. I figure it would pay to do it right the first time, plus I was in the middle of moving our data center and didn't have time to learn the intricacies of VoIP. I haven't had an issue in two years with any of the Cisco gear or experienced any call quality problems.

The entire building is on a generator system, with server-room sized UPS to handle the load while the generator kicks on. Any remote switches - those not in our server room - are protected with a smaller UPS and tied to the generator power. No downtime due to power failures. This should be part of any solid network design.

We have dynamic trunks from Paetec, which have been very reliable. No quality issues or down time. In fact, we had a lightening strike take out 3 of our 4 trunks (fried the smart jack cards) and could still make calls/surf the Internet. Granted it was slow, but frankly I noticed before any of my users.

I did order a separate PRI for our many fax machines, and some POTS lines for a fax server. Most faxes are extensions on the Shoretel system, but I didn't want to mess around with IP trunking for our fax services.

The Shoretel has had a few shortcomings like any system. I don't particularly like their music on queue options for the Contact Center, for example. Overall though, our users love it. We run Citrix, so our folks can use the call manager pretty much anywhere they have an Internet connection. Some of our Call Center agents put the phone out of the way and simply use the call manager software to make/receive calls. I find the call manager very intuitive. Not sure if this is the same with all IP phone systems. And the management of the system is so much better than I had in our old office (though that was a ROLM 9751, so not much of a comparison).

I haven't had a lot of down time, though I do periodically reboot the Shoretel server. We did have a problem with a memory leak on one the the switches when used for music on hold, which has since been corrected. I have upgraded the software myself to realize new features in the system. That's a boon to someone like me who's used to upgrading other systems.

One thing I found particularly useful was the fact that when we moved, there was a small group of folks left in our old building. Since we moved our phone service, their DIDs were now served in our new building. It was rather easy to give them some shoretel phones and have them access dial tone over our WAN. They have the same extensions and are happy not having to install a separate phone system in the old location (we no longer owned the server room part of the old building where the ROLM system was installed). No voice quality issues there either. We didn't install a PoE switch at that site, opting to add power bricks for the few phones there.

I also like the fact that a couple of our remote employees can easily have extension on our HQ system. They use the "Office Anywhere" setup to route calls to their home phone or cell phone without any trouble. They can double-click an extension in the Call Manager and the system will call their target phone and then connect them to a local extension. Pretty handy. Plus, if they call out, the caller ID shows whatever number we program for that extension at our main site.

Maybe some of this stuff is easily doable on non-IP phone systems. In our case we're very happy with the IP phone system we have. I think a lot of this has to do with the intuitive nature of the user interface for the Shoretel system.

I don’t think there’s a one-size-fits-all solution where TDM or VoIP is always going to work. Where there is a robust network in place, VoIP could make sense. If the infrastructure is weak, a TDM or hybrid system might be the answer.

I remember the first Inter-Tel 5000 I installed with IP endpoints on a POE switch. After mounting a 1U chassis into the rack, and plugging in patch cords for the LAN and PRI, I kept looking for what I had missed. No Amphenol’s, no cross-connects – it was just weird.

I also remember asking, many years ago, why would you ever need to put a phone system onto the network. Who knew?

Since this thread seems to be on the pessimistic side of things, here's my viewpoint skewed to that demographic

The biggest problems I see with TDM and Digital systems (generally):
1) It can take days, weeks, months, to add lines to a non-VoIP system, depending on the PSTN demarc type (T1, POTS, etc).
2) New features (not fixes) are usually forklift upgrades
3) Everything is tied to number of ports, not bandwidth
4) Cost for Telco is usually more expensive then Data (think multiple offices)
5) A digital system can only extend to it's local devices, or otherwise limited to the reach of it's interconnects
6) A MAC order must be done to move an extension
7) Often seems like it requires a wall of add-on products to get it to do what the customer really wants (IVR, MoH, etc)
8) Doesn't necessarily play well with other systems


And here is what I don't like about VoIP, and it's variants:
1) Economy of Scale non-existent in small business
2) Requires proper internal network (not necessarily more maintenance, or split network)
3) More complex, making diagnosing more like engineering then trouble shooting
4) Requires quality, broadband internet
5) Router/NAT issues tend to pop-up
6) Not all features work the same (SLA for example)
7) Artificial Limits I.E. Licensing and Subscriptions
8) Potential ancillary costs not anticipated at quote
9) Some SIP "Carriers" can be a real joke!!!

Wish I could comment on Hybrids, but I have never dealt with one. I guess it would be correct to say it's the best and worst of both worlds, like a monkey in the middle. I guess if I was out selling phone to the world I would probably try to pitch a Hybrid most of the time, that way they can have digital simplicity where it makes sense, and the fancy VoIP stuff when they want. Seems like the best option from where I stand.

There are some very strong use case scenarios for VoIP, but they almost always apply to enterprise use or at best medium sized business'. Most small business, which is the bulk of business', will never reach those kinds of levels. Nowhere can this be better seen then in the uncanny resemblance that SS7 and SIP have to each other, with the exception of SS7 circuit-switching the audio and SIP packet-switching it.

About the only major selling point I see for VoIP in a small business is a case where you don't have (or don't want) a brick-and-mortar office. Your average "Executive Office Hotel" comes to mind here. We got a lot of them around here that lawyers buy into. 95% of their work is done at home in their garage, but when they need to meet a client they schedule time to occupy a suite. They have all recently gotten into the virtual-office deal where a receptionist sits at the lobby and answers your line for you. She says whatever greeting you want and can check to see if your phone is DND or not. The rest of the time you get a soft-phone at home or a hard-phone on the desk, and the callers get a simple voicemail drop box after hours. It's all about perception I guess.

I have had IT people tell me how easy phonesystems are that we down loaded the manual off the internet, than ask me several technical questions, my answer was download it off the internet you said phonesystems were easy. By the way they were easy questions. I am quoting a hybrid tomorrow.

I think you guys misunderstood me.

Perhaps my terminaology wasnt the best using hybrid which we use as a system with features of PBX and key.

I meant Hybrid as it relates to a voice/data guy.

A guy that can do both. jeffMoss for instance as well as many of you here.

The hybrid (meaning voice/data guy).

You all know telephony.
Data? It can have many meanings.

Routing?
Switching?
Database?

You dont have to know it all.

80% of the internet runs on Cisco gear and you would be surprised how much the competition is like Cisco from a CLI view.

In my opinion, CCNP level knowledge is more than the phone guy will need. This is a Professional level routing and switching certification.
I do not plan to go beyond this level as it relates to R/S.

The truth is that a huge majority could get by with CCNA level knowledge. Its associate level but let me tell you, its no joke and you will know a huge amount with that certification.

A CCNA level person knows what they dont know and that makes it a good place to be.

Sorry fellas...I meant BECOME as good at data as you are at telephony.

I think CCNA is a must for you guys.
Some of you will fall in love with the subject.
Some of you will get through half of it and realize I was right.
Some of you will go through the course and realize I was right.

Im 45 years old and can say I have always loved what I do. It has never been as much fun as it is now since I have begun the journey.

My only regret is not doing it sooner.

If I can do it, I know you can.

Im willing to help you because I have been through it and hope to make your journey smarter and smoother than mine.

Seeing the feedback makes me thing about traditional PBx and voip systems. I ran a asterisk voip server at home for several years. It used one the old legacy x100p cards. Had nothing but issues with the card but rarely the sip DID from my provider. It is sitting not being used right now, as some one states, takes engineering to set it up right after I upgraded from version 1.4 to 1.6. I will ask in one of the forums on this site how to get it up and running again. But to me, what is important is reliability! I do not need to make redundant service calls simply because its a voip,server,dsl issue. I made contact with one of my old clients who had another company install asterisk in there office. I asked if it was the right choice for them. They said no, it has lots of issues and next time, will go with a different system. That asterisk company has sold out. Wonder why?

BTW, I tool my ccna academy way back in 1997 when Cisco had just announced the voip concept back then. I remember thinking to my self, plug a phone into a router??? Weird! How would that work

I appreciate the postings to this topic that have presented the pros and cons. We have done cabling for several customers that are using VOIP systems. Most of these companies have had little or no problems and express satisfaction with their voip systems. Only one of these companies has reported problems with the initial setup up of a site to site system. I haven't heard lately if the problems have been resolved. I suspect that the success of voip systems is dependent upon the quality of voip providers and the IT professionals that setup and maintain the voip system. We just lost 2 customers we have had for several years to voip systems. I don't know anything about the costs, short or long term, but I do know that they were offered "free" phones and the ability to pay for the service monthly. I wished them well and will be interested in seeing how it works for them.

We have become the IT guy for 70% of our customers. This was not by choice, it just happened. Most of the guys that hang out a IT shingle wouldn't know how to forward a port to save their life. They own no network testing equipment, and think running a blue wire down the wall in a new office building is ok. Regarding Voip, It has it's place, but most small business with a single location have no reason for it.

Agreed! :thumb:

I see VOIP as perfect for the proverbial 'teleworker'. Esp the 'distributed' order taking system.

When you ask a question like that, you sound like I me a few years back

You and all those that are "anti ip" need to get with the program or you will be be out of business in a few years.

I will explain in the "private section"

Walter

Most of the IP systems I've installed have not gone down in quite some time. However, the customers do have massive ups's and failover generators. But these are the few large customers I've dealt with. Most small and midsize customers do have some ups hooked up ahead of the switch, so phones stay up for at least 15 minutes. Most power outages here don't last but a few minutes...accept during hurricanes, and that case, no one is around, lol.

Been working with IP since 1996 when Tadiran used Cisco switches to use QSIG over IP. Still have not been sold as IP being superior for internal dial tone. For outside networking and teleworkers it's great. Personally I like the hybrid...best of both worlds.

If we had a * Like * button I would use it here....LOL.

Let me tell you about the "cutting edge" VOIP phone system where I work (a community college). They had an old analog switched, connect to POTS lines phone system. The phone room was very tidy, but jammed with literally hundreds of pairs coming into the plant. The desk phones cost about $80.00 to replace, but never needed replacing unless the user threw them against the wall (it happened several times). The individual lines went from the switch to the distant closets over old 1A2 25 pair cable, and the remaining 'dead' 25 pair cable had been removed.

On the other hand, the IP system was (and is) a disaster. The IP closets are a rats nest. There are boxes sitting on boxes on the floor, and everything over heats and shuts down. E-mail and internet access is horrible.

Then, along comes a VOIP salesman. Oh, this will save you MILLIONS! Yes, and cost us millions. The desk units cost hunedreds of dollars and routinely break. The service is horrible. Reliability stinks. Calls drop, and often are garbled.

This is exactly what happened when they went from a centrally managed, analog security system and went to an IP system. Doors open at 2 AM and let homeless folk in from the park. Several times, I have arrived at 6:30AM to teach a class, and found several snoozing in the lobby. The campus police tell me that they cannot seem to get through to the decision makers what is happening.

Back to the phones. It has become so terrible, that other decision makers realized that the VOIP system was causing a potentially dangerous situation. So... those of us who are in high traffic areas, low traffic areas, the business office, the police department, and us faculty that request them... guess what? Next to our shiny new VOIP phones, we have a red Cortellco analog phone connected to a POTS line that we actually use! It was supposed to be used for 'emergency only', but now the Cisco VOIP phone set is under the desk, and all is well with the world.

Joe

you can't expect a voip phone system to work on a creaky old network. It is like painting over rust. i advocate the phone system should run on a separate network.

@Butch. I couldn't have stated it any better.
IMHO VoIP systems themselves are inherently no less reliable than non-VoIP systems but often the (data) environment in which they are inserted is terrible. Creating a separate IP phone network is not a good solution ether because you lose out on one of the big advantages, having a single infrastructure. Logical networks aka VLANs within physical networks is really the way to segment, protect and prioritize voice data.

@TeletypeJoe
Every one of the network guys at your community college should be fired.
There is no excuse for the shoddy workmanship at your site. Any network tech that accepts data outages as a normal event does not put any pride in there job. Our average systems availability over the past year is >99.99% and I am working on getting that to 5 nines. I would be fearing for my job if that were <99.9% with out a dam good explanation of why.
There are good network and server techs who understand that uptime, reliability and end-user experience is of paramount importance. Unfortunately good techs seem to be outnumbered by the bad ones who are distracted by the latest greatest shiny object that comes along.

TekMason

Just thinking about why there seems to be so many more poor network/data guys vs. phone guys. It is related to the IP discussion but maybe we should start a separate thread. Below are are some of my thoughts. I welcome your comments and flames.

1. The average age of a phone guy is much more than network guys resulting in lack of experience and maturity.
2. With just a paper cert and being able to operate a mouse can qualify you for an IT job in some organizations. Not so with telephony positions.

More to come...
TekMason

I'd not be so quick to blame the techs. Community colleges are mostly tax payer funded and what with the wave of tax resentment washing over the land CCs have taken huge hits to their budgets. This does underscore a critical point: VoIP is very expensive and doing it on the cheap will only lead to a disaster and a waste of money. You can have a flaky data network and nobody notices because errors get corrected and delays are measured in milliseconds. But you do not have that luxury with VoIP. Any weakness in the infrastructure will be heard in your ear.

Point taken PMCook.
However, I don't think that funding cuts is a valid excuse for shoddy work though. It doesn't cost more money to do a neat and tidy job and clean up the mess. BTW I work for a municipal government and money is not exacly flowing IT's way. We have to constantly learn to do more with less and work smarter not necessarily harder.

From TeletypeJoe's post, it appears that the network is so bad that it is having a major impact on some of the most error tolerant data applications (email and Internet access).

True, PCs and other data devices are much forgiving to delays. However, in my experience this forgiveness usually just masks the fundamental problems and you will get bitten in the butt eventually because the underlying problems never go away and only get worse.
TekMason

To me, at least in my experience, VOIP is a solution to a problem that did not exist. The analog system worked fine, worked when storms knocked out the power, worked every hour of every day that I was there.

The VOIP system worked *maybe* fifty percent of the time. It had no features that I could use, and none that I needed. The problems were continuous, as were the excuses. The only good thing that came of it (once the analog Cortelcos were installed) is that they can angle nicely to use as a foot rest under my desk.

For my computer / internet needs at work, I use a laptop with wireless service that my department pays the subscription for as the IP system stinks and internet use is horrible. It is easier to use the wireless system then log on to the district's main website to access the student database that to use the wired network.

And the sad thing is this... the VOIP system that was *supposed* to save us "millions" actually according to the accounting department costs us far more than the analog system cost.

Because of all of this, if I were to ever have a business, I would never use IP telephony.

Joe

Indeed. I have learned that I will never, and I mean never, quote an IP ystem until I have done a thorough evaluation and possibly even ran a Wireshark collection for 24 hours. And if I determine that they need to spend a lot of money on their infrastructure and they balk, well I'll walk. There is no hell like network hell. I can see a lot of pissed off customers blaming me for their crappy network. And a lot of declined invoices which could easily ruin me with the first one. VoIP has the potential for being a real snake pit.

@TeletypeJoe
It is unfortunate that you had such a difficult time with your VoIP system and data network. Let me assure you that it is possible to provision a reliable and redundant network that works well all of the time. This includes providing power to your phone when the power goes out with UPSs in the same way your digital/analog phone gets power. It costs money to do this but we already have to spend that money to ensure that our network is reliable and redundant.
I am actually surprised that your IP phone worked as much as 50% of the time if with your PC/data network being so bad.
BTW I'd buy that Cisco IP set for enough to get yourself a darn fancy foot stool.
@PMCook
You are a very wise man to do a network evaluation before quoting an IP system. Customers are always looking for a scapegoat when a project goes bad. The guy that sold and configures the VoIP that doesn't work (for whatever reason) is always the target.
TekMason

We have been told that by next fall there will be a major IT upgrade to the network done by outside contractors. I do not doubt those who say that a IP phone system can be made to work well, and maybe it will work well for us once the upgrade is finished. I only hope that the install is done as neatly as the old phone system installation was.

However, in our situation, I just see no need for it. I will grant you that I am a bit of an "old schooler" when it comes to some tech things,(remember, I collect, use and restore 1940's-1950's era communication equipment) but I also understand and appreciate the need for computers and networking. Heck, I even have an I-pad along with my notebook. I might even be willing to accept the idea of IP telephony in a large (say educational institution) if the physical plant is being built from the ground up. However, for existing facilities with an in place analog phone system that works and works well, why change?

I am not slamming network guys. I just see the wisdom in the old addage of 'why fix it if it ain't broke?'

TeletypeJoe said:
Not True!! The problem was very real: Analog and TDM phone systems last for years and years, which is a nightmare for a marketing department that is used to customers who upgrade their hardware and software every year. IT executives hate the idea of equipment with a life span even more than you hate cheap plastic crap. The reasons for this hatred of real telecommunications equipment are many:

1. It's not cheap plastic crap. You really expect them to buy something that doesn't look like a kid's toy? Perish the thought.

2. It's not disposable. Therefore, they are expected to actually install the equipment, rather than simply laying it on the floor and taping the cables to the wall with masking tape. What a PITA.

3. Again, it's not disposable. Therefore, they are expected to find and fix any bugs (another PITA), rather than just telling the end user to wait a few months for the new version.

I could go on like this, but you have all heard my rants too many times already...

Jim
**************************************************
Speaking from a secure undisclosed location.

Do software upgrades count towards down time?

Typically scheduled downtime or outages do not count. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Scheduled_and_Unscheduled_Downtime

Kind of what I thought......

Not completely down on IP But:


Some unscrupulous dealers rip off customers with BS like $10K Paging Servers! (At a school bus barn,)
Obviously Paging is much better with a SERVER.

IMHO That is not a good argument for or against IP systems brokeda.
There are unscrupulous dealers everywhere selling every product, service and system you could imagine.
TekMason

Actually, having to add a server to actually page IS..when that is an accepted feature of a modern phone system.

The problem with IP isn't IP. It's logic. Anyone that has taken even a rudementary class in logic 101 can look at a schematic and see what extra steps are needed to get VOIP or actually, the more PROPER term should be TOIP, to work properly and perform at a level that is acceptable for internal dial tone. Understand I come from the computer side of the house (computer science) so I can see some of the advantages of TOIP..but the extra work to make it happen makes almost little of no sense for internal dial tone.

It reminds me of the story of the millions of dollars and engineering NASA spent on making a pen that could would work in near zero g. The Russian response....use a pencil.

That's a good one.

The Russians just used a pencil instead of a zero-gravity pen maybe, but they didn't make it to the moon, did they? And without the space pen, where would Seinfeld be?

Interesting that you bring up the Russion pencil and American pen in space story. It is a myth. The Fisher Pen Company developed the Space Pen in the mid-1960s. They did this on their own, without prompting by NASA and without and government money. In addition, he Russians abandoned special pencils and switched over to pressurized space pens in 1969.

There were very good reasons to use the more expensive space pens (~$4) on space missions. Because of the danger that a broken-off pencil tip poses in zero gravity and the flammable nature of the wood present in pencils a better solution was needed.

There are some good reasons that make a solid business cases to use IP system.
I don't think using a $10k server to add paging is one of those though.

TekMason

LOL, hook line and sinker. I quoted that myth knowing that someone would try and dismiss what it was saying by using Wiki or other site. I also looked in up and I assume you used cut and paste because it looks verbatim. As a side note you should always link source sites when and IF you do that as a courtesy. BTW it did still cost 2 million..for a pen..and that was in dollars in THAT day and age.

I agree 10k for a paging server seems quite a lot and you will run into people overcharging..but it happens and customers should price check. I find that Nationals do this as a matter of business because they have them.

I wonder what would happen if that pen broke and ink started going everywhere?

Hey, you didn't cite the source of the myth that you quoted Coral. LOL

I hazard to guess that a broken space pen would be...hazardous to the mission. You can quote me on that

BTW Do you still use vinyl records and VCR tapes as opposed to IPods, MP3s, CDs and DVDs?

TekMason

Interesting timing: Space Pen episode on TBS Seinfeld tonight.

Dang, I am so PROUD of this thread! I don't recall who made the statement a dozen or more posts back, but he's got the 'hot setup' in my opinion. "combination of TDM and VOIP is best".

This is a great thread Lightning.
Lots of excellent points have been made here for both sides. There is no right answer.
I think it really comes down to where your expertise lies and the particular application. Obviously my expertise is in networking and IP.
A few important points for me that I don't think has been expressed here are vendor lock-in and common infrastructure and skills sets.
SIP to the desktop is one way to avoid vendor lock-in with the bonus of mobility inside and outside of our facilities.
Common wired and wireless infrastructure to service wired and wireless PC and telephony devices has a lot of benefit but...that single infrastructure has to be rock solid. Since the data side of my job requires that it is already there for the voice.
TekMason

Yes, to answer someone's question directed at another person, I do as a matter of fact use vinyl LPs and 45s. THough they do not have the dynamic range of a CD, they are actualy very natural sounding, compared to the 16 bit digital recordings on CDs and WAY better than MP3 audio.

Heck, I still use a Teletype (cap T) to print news feeds.

But then, I also have a 1A2 system that I am restoring, and will use that in my home as well.

No, I do not reject computers or networking. I will install a network as well. I simply will not use it to talk on. I will use a POTS line and analog telephony equipment from the days when phones were phones and men (and women) knew the difference between plastic junk and the real thing... (-: