Hi there, I'm looking to set up a home-office PBX/Asterisk lab using a VIA EPIA motherboard as an always on, low powered solution. I am trying to find out the differences between a solution using an external ATA (like the Sipura SPA-3000) or an internal PCI card (like the Sangoma A200 with 2 FXO 2 FXS ports). Can someone tell me what the major functionality and limitations are when using the two devices with Asterisk? I am looking for things like configuration, power draw, sending faxes, etc. So far I have these: Sipura SPA-3000 ------------------------- External - can be located remotely from Asterisk server, can be used with an embedded solution (NSLU2) or a server with no PCI slot (smaller footprint and lower power draw). The problem with this is that there are more power blocks/adaptors needed. Draws about 5W (according to the statistics). Ports - 1xFXO and 1xFXS Cost - 80 UK pounds Features not in Sangoma A200: Sangoma A200 (A20101) ------------------------------------ Internal PCI - half or full hight. Ports - 2xFXO and 2xFXO, power consumption ??? cost: 200 UK pounds Features not in Sipura SPA-3000: Thanks in advance!
Stephen G wrote:> Hi there, > > I'm looking to set up a home-office PBX/Asterisk lab using a VIA EPIA motherboard as an always on, low powered solution. > > I am trying to find out the differences between a solution using an external ATA (like the Sipura SPA-3000) or an internal PCI card (like the Sangoma A200 with 2 FXO 2 FXS ports). > > Can someone tell me what the major functionality and limitations are when using the two devices with Asterisk? I am looking for things like configuration, power draw, sending faxes, etc. > > So far I have these: > > Sipura SPA-3000 > ------------------------- > External - can be located remotely from Asterisk server, can be used with an embedded solution (NSLU2) or a server with no PCI slot (smaller footprint and lower power draw). The problem with this is that there are more power blocks/adaptors needed. Draws about 5W (according to the statistics). > Ports - 1xFXO and 1xFXS > Cost - 80 UK pounds > Features not in Sangoma A200: > > Sangoma A200 (A20101) > ------------------------------------ > > Internal PCI - half or full hight. > Ports - 2xFXO and 2xFXO, power consumption ??? > cost: 200 UK pounds > Features not in Sipura SPA-3000:One of the biggest differences is the spa3k is rather limited in terms of echo cancellation. If your pstn line is outside the limits of the spa3k's echo canceller, you'll have less then acceptable audio quality. Unfortunately, there isn't any nice way to identify your pstn line characters (etc) without trying it. Also, a few users complain about voice interpreted as dtmf signaling under some circumstances. Having spent two years with the spa3k in multiple environments, I'd suggest your alternative choice of the A200 card is a better one. Power consumption has nothing to do with your choices really.
Stephen, In my experience setting up an office PBX, I started with several SPA-3000's and eventually decided to go with an A200d. There were two reasons for changing to the A200: 1. Hardware echo canceller. Despite all the configuration settings I tried, there was always a faint echo with the SPA-3000 that the users kept mentioning. The A200's echo canceller killed the echo in conversations - saving both the user's and my sanity. The only echo now is when people are using speakerphones with the speaker volume cranked up (SNOM 320's). 2. I had several instances with the SPA-3000s where they dropped calls or bridged two local people into the same PSTN line. This could have partially been the way I was trying to use it - relying on the 3000 to reject a request for an outgoing call before trying the next one. Any erratic behaviour seemed to coincide with it re-registering to the asterisk server. I was able to reproduce dropped calls on 4 different units with different FW versions by setting the register time to 1s, and hammering it with multiple outgoing calls. Since I went with the A200, I didn't follow this up or investigate further. It seems that YMMV with the SPA-3000 - my opinion is that they work great for home use, but I wouldn't use them for a business application. Most fax transmissions worked well for both of them when going directly from the FXO to the FXS ports, but not 100%. We eventually plugged the fax directly into it's own dedicated line - taking the fax line out of the phone system. Configuration of the 3000's looks daunting at first, but isn't too bad after you've done it a couple times. I had some issues getting the echo canceller on the A200 working when it was first installed, but after I got it working (their tech support responded quickly) I re-installed the entire system twice from scratch and couldn't reproduce the issue. I don't know the power consumption of the A200. If you are sizing up equipment, I wouldn't rule out the digium cards. I did some limited testing with a Digium TDM 400P - I don't recall any issues. I think you need to go to a TDM2400P to get the HWEC. Perhaps a SBC with a PCI Slot would suit your purpose if you decide to go with an internal card? Regards, Dana Harding ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen G" <sgreszcz@yahoo.com> To: <asterisk-users@lists.digium.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 7:20 AM Subject: [asterisk-users] Sipura SPA-3000 vs Sangoma A200> Hi there, > > I'm looking to set up a home-office PBX/Asterisk lab using a VIA EPIA > motherboard as an always on, low powered solution. > > I am trying to find out the differences between a solution using an > external ATA (like the Sipura SPA-3000) or an internal PCI card (like the > Sangoma A200 with 2 FXO 2 FXS ports). > > Can someone tell me what the major functionality and limitations are when > using the two devices with Asterisk? I am looking for things like > configuration, power draw, sending faxes, etc. > > So far I have these: > > Sipura SPA-3000 > ------------------------- > External - can be located remotely from Asterisk server, can be used with > an embedded solution (NSLU2) or a server with no PCI slot (smaller > footprint and lower power draw). The problem with this is that there are > more power blocks/adaptors needed. Draws about 5W (according to the > statistics). > Ports - 1xFXO and 1xFXS > Cost - 80 UK pounds > Features not in Sangoma A200: > > Sangoma A200 (A20101) > ------------------------------------ > > Internal PCI - half or full hight. > Ports - 2xFXO and 2xFXO, power consumption ??? > cost: 200 UK pounds > Features not in Sipura SPA-3000: > > Thanks in advance! > _______________________________________________ > --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
I echo (pun intended) Rich's response. The Spa3k is ~ok~ but echo has always been a problem for my home office. The A200D works flawlessly.> I'm looking to set up a home-office PBX/Asterisk lab using a VIA EPIA motherboard as an always on, low powered solution. >I have seen an A200D in a soekris 4801 (http://www.soekris.com) box running astlinux. I say "saw", because it was at a show and the box wasn't plugged in. It was Jim VanMeggelen - one of the authors of the O'Reilly Asterisk book. You might want to drop him a line. The Sangoma has a 4-pin molex for power supply connection to augment the PCI bus when you need to generate ring voltage for FXS ports. The soekris (by default) won't give you that so either you put FXS external or you figure out how to get +5/+12 VDC to the Sangoma. Actually, you may want to check with Sangoma ... maybe you only need 5 or 12 but they just match the molex to be compliant with all PC hardware.> I am trying to find out the differences between a solution using an external ATA (like the Sipura SPA-3000) or an internal PCI card (like the Sangoma A200 with 2 FXO 2 FXS ports). > >The nice thing about the SPA3K is that upon registration failure or power failure the FXO & FXS ports get hardwired together so you get a power safe environment. The nice thing about the Sangoma is that it supports ring contexts by distinctive ring. I believe this is also called Ident-a-call in many places. For a home office this is great. I have a second number that rings my primary line with a different ring pattern for ~ 4.00/mth. rather than the expense of a second line. I program that ring pattern into zapata.conf and push those calls directly to Zap/4 (my fax) and other calls to Zap/3 (my house), etc.... dbc.
On 8/9/06, Stephen G <sgreszcz@yahoo.com> wrote:> Hi there, > > I'm looking to set up a home-office PBX/Asterisk lab using a VIA EPIA motherboard as an always on, low powered solution.Hi Stephen, I have an A200 with 1 x FXO module board in it. I'm in the Uk using a BT line and am having a lot of bother with hangup detection, or rather lack of it! I've reported this to Sangoma and I've tried several things but as yet it is not fixed, so be wary. Mike