Any opinions on the best ATA? For example, if someone was having a problem and I wanted to rule out any ATA glitches or firmware issues, what device could I give them that I could count on to always be a trouble free top performer that just plain works?
The newer linksys ata's have been pretty consistent for me. But then again, ata's are fairly reliable. -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:26 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: [asterisk-users] Best ATA. Period. Any opinions on the best ATA? For example, if someone was having a problem and I wanted to rule out any ATA glitches or firmware issues, what device could I give them that I could count on to always be a trouble free top performer that just plain works? _______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users This E-mail, including any attachments, may be intended solely for the personal and confidential use of the sender and recipient(s) named above. This message may include advisory, consultative and/or deliberative material and, as such, would be privileged and confidential and not a public document. Pursuant to 42 CFR, any information in this e-mail identifying a former, present, or potential client of Straight & Narrow is confidential. If you have received this e-mail in error, you must not review, transmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it and you must delete this message. You are requested to notify the sender by return e-mail.
> > For example, if someone was having a problem and I wanted to rule out > any ATA glitches or firmware issues, what device could I give them that > I could count on to always be a trouble free top performer that just > plain works?Tin cans and string. Very easy to set up. Very easy to diagnose if it does not work (check for tear in brown paper diaphragm or string not tight). All other devices are subject to failure and counting on anything to just work is a short path to frustration and failure. -- George Pajari (dCAP), netVOICE communications 604 484 VOIP(8647) x102 www.netvoice.ca www.ip-centrex.ca www.ip-pbx.ca www.vpas.ca www.digium.ca www.grandstream.ca www.sipura.ca www.snom.ca Open Source VoIP/Telephony Specialists 1 877 NET VOIP (638 8647 x102)
Hmmmm. Does Digium make a card for that?> > Tin cans and string. Very easy to set up. Very easy to diagnose if it > does not work (check for tear in brown paper diaphragm or string not tight). > > All other devices are subject to failure and counting on anything to > just work is a short path to frustration and failure. > >
In all seriousness, my requirements were a little silly. A Cisco router can fail just as a netgear router can. But I think we would find Cisco failures to be statistically less likely. I also think we can agree that not all devices of a certain type are created equal. Do you have any opinions on which VoIP products are more likely to be consistent and reliable?> > > Tin cans and string. Very easy to set up. Very easy to diagnose if it > does not work (check for tear in brown paper diaphragm or string not tight). > > All other devices are subject to failure and counting on anything to > just work is a short path to frustration and failure. > >
George Pajari wrote:> www.netvoice.ca www.ip-centrex.ca www.ip-pbx.ca www.vpas.ca > www.digium.ca www.grandstream.ca www.sipura.ca www.snom.caCanadian domain names must be cheap these days ... ;) Regards, Philipp Kempgen
Linksys SPA 2102. No issues at all. Period. Regards, Mindaugas Kezys http://www.kolmisoft.com MOR PRO - Advanced Billing for Asterisk PBX -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 11:26 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: [asterisk-users] Best ATA. Period. Any opinions on the best ATA? For example, if someone was having a problem and I wanted to rule out any ATA glitches or firmware issues, what device could I give them that I could count on to always be a trouble free top performer that just plain works? _______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Of the three ATAs I've got (Linksys PAP2-NA, Sipura SPA-2000 and SPA-3000) the Linksys PAP2-NA is the best of the bunch, even though the SPA-2000 is supposedly cut from the same mould. For the most part, you set 'em and forget 'em. Most of the time when I have a problem with a phone connected to the PAP2, I discover that the phone itself has locked up. The company I work for also sells them - though I've had my PAP2 for a lot longer than I've worked there. Adam Moffett wrote:> Any opinions on the best ATA? > > For example, if someone was having a problem and I wanted to rule out > any ATA glitches or firmware issues, what device could I give them that > I could count on to always be a trouble free top performer that just > plain works? > > > _______________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >
About the only reason for eliminating SpanDSP is compatibility with the GPL license. Remember that /any/ feature added to the free version of Asterisk is going to be added to ABE as well - ergo, the licensing of any libraries required need to be compatible with a /non/-open source license. Thomas Kenyon wrote:> Michelle Dupuis wrote: > >> Wow, an answer phrased in the form of a flame... >> >> A more supportive tone might actually encourage the Asterisk userbase to >> grow! >> >> > Okay, if you really want a more constructive answer. > > The addition to asterisk was an API change to allow app_fax from > asterisk-addons to talk to asterisk. > > app_fax uses spandsp. > > Why on earth would you want to eliminiate the need for spandsp? > It would involve re-doing really a lot of work, and spandsp is one of > the finest pieces of coding to be associated with asterisk. > > Is that supportive enough? > > Bug ID #0011761 looks more interesting. > > _______________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20080224/96bc1251/attachment.htm