Hi all, This is a NEWBIE question, so all you experienced types that are tired of stupid questions can move on... I've pretty much given up trying to do my entire phone system over IP (including local service), so I have to select and provision my local CO lines. I need about 10-12 lines which can be POTS lines, of course. But, I thought, why not get something digital and expandable like a DS1, PRI, T1 or whatever they call it with 23 or 24 channels of 64 kbps voice. It seems like it would be simpler for me to deal with this (and better quality) and it *should* be simpler for the phone company, too. However, while everyone can sell me POTS lines, when I ask about getting these in some sort of digital muxed interface, I seem to confuse the providers. In one case, I was able to get something called "channelized T1" which cost a lot and did not actually include the "phone" service for any of the channels, that was additional. So the cost to go from POTS lines to something digital was extreme, so much more than I can't understand why anyone would have T1 voice interfaces, yet all the PBXes have this and it seems commonly used. I must be doing this "wrong". Okay, so I need help with: 1. Understanding terminology so I can ask for the "right thing". 2. Advice on when it is reasonable to go POTS versus something else and what that something else is. 3. Feedback on what others are doing with 10-12 lines in the US that may want to expand to ~20 lines. 4. Interfacing so many POTS lines to Asterisk. I guess that means an FXO channel bank to T1 card? Kind of stupid to go digital/analog/digital in the last 100 feet. Help? -- Mike Ciholas (812) 476-2721 voice CIHOLAS Enterprises (812) 476-2881 fax 2626 Kotter Ave, Unit D mikec@ciholas.com Evansville, IN 47715 http://www.ciholas.com
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Mike Ciholas wrote:> However, while everyone can sell me POTS lines, when I ask about > getting these in some sort of digital muxed interface, I seem to > confuse the providers. In one case, I was able to get something > called "channelized T1" which cost a lot and did not actually > include the "phone" service for any of the channels, that was > additional. So the cost to go from POTS lines to something > digital was extreme, so much more than I can't understand why > anyone would have T1 voice interfaces, yet all the PBXes have > this and it seems commonly used. I must be doing this "wrong".Any t1 service is generally going to cost more than pots service. Not sure why either, with economy of scale, etc. Who is your local telco?> 1. Understanding terminology so I can ask for the "right thing".Channelized T1 or an ISDN PRI.> 2. Advice on when it is reasonable to go POTS versus something > else and what that something else is.Unless you need/want DID and the other features, t1 won't be less expensive for you. It will do more but cost more.> 3. Feedback on what others are doing with 10-12 lines in the US > that may want to expand to ~20 lines.Most people that go with t1 start breaking even or losing less money at 15-20 lines.> 4. Interfacing so many POTS lines to Asterisk. I guess that > means an FXO channel bank to T1 card? Kind of stupid to go > digital/analog/digital in the last 100 feet.Depending on what kind of system you buy initially, ISDN is more flexible than straight channelized. dave -- Dave Weis "I believe there are more instances of the abridgment djweis@sjdjweis.com of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."- James Madison
On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 10:20, Mike Ciholas wrote:> Hi all, > > This is a NEWBIE question, so all you experienced types that are > tired of stupid questions can move on...Ah, but you followed all the right things to do, no HTML email, started a new thread, and you didn't demand someone solve your problem. You asked for education in a polite manner. For this I hope many people answer your questions.> I've pretty much given up trying to do my entire phone system > over IP (including local service), so I have to select and > provision my local CO lines. I need about 10-12 lines which can > be POTS lines, of course. But, I thought, why not get something > digital and expandable like a DS1, PRI, T1 or whatever they call > it with 23 or 24 channels of 64 kbps voice. It seems like it > would be simpler for me to deal with this (and better quality) > and it *should* be simpler for the phone company, too.Your thinking is sound so far.> However, while everyone can sell me POTS lines, when I ask about > getting these in some sort of digital muxed interface, I seem to > confuse the providers. In one case, I was able to get something > called "channelized T1" which cost a lot and did not actually > include the "phone" service for any of the channels, that was > additional. So the cost to go from POTS lines to something > digital was extreme, so much more than I can't understand why > anyone would have T1 voice interfaces, yet all the PBXes have > this and it seems commonly used. I must be doing this "wrong".It seems so funny how easy it is to confuse the Telcos about what you want. They seem to be so used to dealing with at most a select few PBX integrators who steer clients to them with all the appropriate information filled out already.> Okay, so I need help with: > > 1. Understanding terminology so I can ask for the "right thing".You may have a hard time getting PRI in so few channels, but PRI is probably what you would want. You may also need to reference it as ISDN PRI. DS1 is the same as a T1. Channelized T1 is usually RBS and is only a 56k voice channel( 7bits, 1 bit is robbed for signaling). Channelized T1 is basically analog service multiplexed onto a digital trunk. More for why PRI is probably a better option, if you have customers who complain about how many rings it takes to answer the phone, PRI can signal your PBX about the call before a ring is ever generated. Your PBX can even answer the line with out a ring being generated. I never knew doctors could be affected by as little as 1 ring difference in pickup time, but they let me know when I went behind our asterisk box that the reduction from 2 rings to 1 ring was great.> 2. Advice on when it is reasonable to go POTS versus something > else and what that something else is.Basically your choices are POTS or T1. It is reasonable to go POTS for 5 or fewer lines as the cost of transport on a T1 is higher than the cost of the 5 lines. Above 5 lines and hardware starts becoming a problem. At around 10-12 lines the cost and scalability should start to swing in favor of T1 and will increasingly do so as you add lines. Our PRI costs us about $30 per channel of voice, before we get into some site specific fees, but in this cost we get callerid and 20 DIDs and it seems the ability to send whatever callerid we choose(found this out using the iaxclient software for windows, saw a 700123456 number on a cell phone).> 3. Feedback on what others are doing with 10-12 lines in the US > that may want to expand to ~20 lines.PRI sounds like your best bet if you can get it below 23 channels, as it wouldn't take much for them to just turn up a new channel for use.> 4. Interfacing so many POTS lines to Asterisk. I guess that > means an FXO channel bank to T1 card? Kind of stupid to go > digital/analog/digital in the last 100 feet.Yep, not to mention that even used FXO channel banks cost almost as much as they where new. -- Steven Critchfield <critch@basesys.com>
> -----Original Message----- > From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com > [mailto:asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com]On Behalf Of Mike Ciholas > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 10:21 AM > To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com > Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Provisioning CO lines > > > > Hi all, > > This is a NEWBIE question, so all you experienced types that are > tired of stupid questions can move on... > > I've pretty much given up trying to do my entire phone system > over IP (including local service), so I have to select and > provision my local CO lines. I need about 10-12 lines which can > be POTS lines, of course. But, I thought, why not get something > digital and expandable like a DS1, PRI, T1 or whatever they call > it with 23 or 24 channels of 64 kbps voice. It seems like it > would be simpler for me to deal with this (and better quality) > and it *should* be simpler for the phone company, too. > > However, while everyone can sell me POTS lines, when I ask about > getting these in some sort of digital muxed interface, I seem to > confuse the providers. In one case, I was able to get something > called "channelized T1" which cost a lot and did not actually > include the "phone" service for any of the channels, that was > additional. So the cost to go from POTS lines to something > digital was extreme, so much more than I can't understand why > anyone would have T1 voice interfaces, yet all the PBXes have > this and it seems commonly used. I must be doing this "wrong". > > Okay, so I need help with: > > 1. Understanding terminology so I can ask for the "right thing". > > 2. Advice on when it is reasonable to go POTS versus something > else and what that something else is. > > 3. Feedback on what others are doing with 10-12 lines in the US > that may want to expand to ~20 lines. > > 4. Interfacing so many POTS lines to Asterisk. I guess that > means an FXO channel bank to T1 card? Kind of stupid to go > digital/analog/digital in the last 100 feet. > > Help? > > -- > Mike Ciholas (812) 476-2721 voice > CIHOLAS Enterprises (812) 476-2881 fax > 2626 Kotter Ave, Unit D mikec@ciholas.com > Evansville, IN 47715 http://www.ciholas.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-usersMike, I opted for an "integrated T-1" for 1 customer who needed about 12 lines. I configured it with 12 lines voices and 768k data. Chances are you need this kind of bandwidth if you need 12 phone lines. Combining it on 1 T-1 can make it a little more cost effective and of course one of the big advantages is reliability over dsl. They should be able to provide equipment that will give you 2 T-1 outputs, one of wich you just go straight into a T110P. Sincerely, Andy Hester Consero
On Thursday, August 21, 2003 10:21 AM, Mike Ciholas [SMTP:mikec@ciholas.com] wrote:> > Hi all, > > This is a NEWBIE question, so all you experienced types that are > tired of stupid questions can move on... > > I've pretty much given up trying to do my entire phone system > over IP (including local service), so I have to select and > provision my local CO lines. I need about 10-12 lines which can > be POTS lines, of course. But, I thought, why not get something > digital and expandable like a DS1, PRI, T1 or whatever they call > it with 23 or 24 channels of 64 kbps voice. It seems like it > would be simpler for me to deal with this (and better quality) > and it *should* be simpler for the phone company, too. > > However, while everyone can sell me POTS lines, when I ask about > getting these in some sort of digital muxed interface, I seem to > confuse the providers. In one case, I was able to get something > called "channelized T1" which cost a lot and did not actually > include the "phone" service for any of the channels, that was > additional. So the cost to go from POTS lines to something > digital was extreme, so much more than I can't understand why > anyone would have T1 voice interfaces, yet all the PBXes have > this and it seems commonly used. I must be doing this "wrong". > > Okay, so I need help with: > > 1. Understanding terminology so I can ask for the "right thing".You want either a PRI ISDN which would provide 23 lines or a T1 with DID/DOD trunks. Our local phone company will provide anywhere from 1 to 24 trunks on a T1. We pay a fee for the T1 and then so much per trunk. As for terminology, don't ask for pots lines, ask for trunks or ISDN.> > 2. Advice on when it is reasonable to go POTS versus something > else and what that something else is. > > 3. Feedback on what others are doing with 10-12 lines in the US > that may want to expand to ~20 lines.Definitely go with a T1. The only question is whether it will have trunks or if it will be ISDN.> > 4. Interfacing so many POTS lines to Asterisk. I guess that > means an FXO channel bank to T1 card? Kind of stupid to go > digital/analog/digital in the last 100 feet.No, you would not use a channel bank and POTS lines at all. Run the phone company provided T1 directly into a Digium T100P card in your * server.> > Help? > > -- > Mike Ciholas (812) 476-2721 voice > CIHOLAS Enterprises (812) 476-2881 fax > 2626 Kotter Ave, Unit D mikec@ciholas.com > Evansville, IN 47715 http://www.ciholas.com
> Mike, > I opted for an "integrated T-1" for 1 customer who needed about 12 lines. > I configured it with 12 lines voices and 768k data. Chances are you need > this kind of bandwidth if you need 12 phone lines. Combining it on 1 T-1 > can make it a little more cost effective and of course one of the big > advantages is reliability over dsl. They should be able to provide > equipment that will give you 2 T-1 outputs, one of wich you just go straight > into a T110P.Or you take the T1 directly into the T100P and tell the zaptel drivers to use channels 1-12 as voice channels and the other 12 channels as an HDLC/PPP datalink. *poof* Your asterisk box becomes a PBX and a router.
I discovered and deployed a solution some would consider counter-intuitive. For whatever reason, I can get a dedicated long-distance T1 for about $400 MRC ($16 per line) while a "local" T1 costs over $1,200 MRC ($50 per line). My telco automatically assumed I would want/need the local T1 for my local traffic but when I did the math it was all backwards. All inbound calls for a local T1 are free. However, most companies hook a toll-free number to ring through to their local number so many incoming calls cost the switched long-distance rate of 5 cents per minute. Outbound local calls are free too, but outbound long-distance calls were 5 cents per minute for switched long-distance. For the dedicated long-distance T1, all inbound and outbound calls cost 1.9 cents per minute, even if you are calling a toll-free number or the company next door. Instead of having local DIDs, we simply got a huge supply of toll-free numbers, all with unique DNIS so we use them as DIDs for not only direct voice numbers but also direct fax numbers. The short story is that 90% of our outbound calls were long-distance and 90% of our incoming calls were toll-free so paying $800 more MRC and 3.1 cents more per minute for a local T1 made no sense. The break-even point is going to be different for everyone depending on your total call volume and the relative difference between costs for each type of line. For us, the break-even occured at around 40% local calls. What I mean is that if 40 or more percent of our inbound and outbound calls were to local numbers, then getting local calls for free benefits us enough so that a local T1 saves us money. Do the math for your company.> -----Original Message----- > From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com > [mailto:asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com]On Behalf Of Mike Ciholas > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 9:21 AM > To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com > Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Provisioning CO lines > > > > Hi all, > > This is a NEWBIE question, so all you experienced types that are > tired of stupid questions can move on... > > I've pretty much given up trying to do my entire phone system > over IP (including local service), so I have to select and > provision my local CO lines. I need about 10-12 lines which can > be POTS lines, of course. But, I thought, why not get something > digital and expandable like a DS1, PRI, T1 or whatever they call > it with 23 or 24 channels of 64 kbps voice. It seems like it > would be simpler for me to deal with this (and better quality) > and it *should* be simpler for the phone company, too. > > However, while everyone can sell me POTS lines, when I ask about > getting these in some sort of digital muxed interface, I seem to > confuse the providers. In one case, I was able to get something > called "channelized T1" which cost a lot and did not actually > include the "phone" service for any of the channels, that was > additional. So the cost to go from POTS lines to something > digital was extreme, so much more than I can't understand why > anyone would have T1 voice interfaces, yet all the PBXes have > this and it seems commonly used. I must be doing this "wrong". > > Okay, so I need help with: > > 1. Understanding terminology so I can ask for the "right thing". > > 2. Advice on when it is reasonable to go POTS versus something > else and what that something else is. > > 3. Feedback on what others are doing with 10-12 lines in the US > that may want to expand to ~20 lines. > > 4. Interfacing so many POTS lines to Asterisk. I guess that > means an FXO channel bank to T1 card? Kind of stupid to go > digital/analog/digital in the last 100 feet. > > Help? > > -- > Mike Ciholas (812) 476-2721 voice > CIHOLAS Enterprises (812) 476-2881 fax > 2626 Kotter Ave, Unit D mikec@ciholas.com > Evansville, IN 47715 http://www.ciholas.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, David Carr wrote:> I discovered and deployed a solution some would consider > counter-intuitive.I love "out of the box" thinking. What kind of business is it?> For whatever reason, I can get a dedicated long-distance T1 for > about $400 MRC ($16 per line)