That's a good article. There is no systematic way and toolset to ensure end to end QoS. It requires expertise in the design and architecture. -mikesmith(老猫) @佛州华人论坛:佛州枫下论坛 The Rolia Forum of Florida

However, with the experience, it can be done and have been achieved in some implementations.

http://nwm.networkingpipeline.com/trends/161501006

Nortel. CS2K has always win TDM to Packet Voice revolution in many ISPs. MCS5200 is a total SIP solution. Would be a good product if the price can be lowered. -iambigcat(cat); 2005-6-14 (#2346382@0)

In the enterprise area, Nortel's been to slow to come up with an IP solution. -mikesmith(老猫); 2005-6-14 {381} (#2346413@0)
For years we have been hearing succession series, while CallManager release 3 has taken the market share already. But I believe Nortel is strong in ISP solution, while Cisco CallManager is just not scalable to be up to the job.
For SIP, lack of feature and security is a big concern with enterprise customer, but its scalability and simplicity are really attractive to ISP's.
想不到有人做CS2K！交流交流？ -beech(beech); 2005-6-14 {217} (#2346499@0)
本人是CISCO IP 出身，CISCO的东西也弄得差不多了，MPLS/BGP/CVOICE 等等。
因公司和个人双方需要，正在往VOICE转。
但发现传统VOICE很难。
比如了解了CS2K和PVG的结构，但是不懂怎样config CS2K和XA-CORE等等。
老兄是做什么的？

跟你一样,做IP的. VoIP曾做过一点SIP, 也就是Nortel MCS5200的前身,在国内的时候对这个特敢兴趣,可惜来加后找不找做SIP的工作,只好重新做IP了. -iambigcat(cat); 2005-6-15 {228} (#2346958@0)
CS2K没有voice的基础,很难上上手.Nortel的做CS2K的人基本原来都是做DMS的. PVG简单些.

其实IP也有很多东西,我原来不是做Cisco的,现在补cisco知识,也觉得挺有意思. 可是还想有一天做点VoIP的大项目,或者IPTV也行.

你是CCIE 么? 在那里高就?

PM. -beech(beech); 2005-6-15 (#2347097@0)

Going with IP should be a wise choice, in my point of view. -dotod(Hewllet Greger); 2005-6-15 {953} (#2347381@0)

The market has been reacting on the technology in the past 3 -4 years, it has seen many different approachs, like decoupling switching and transportation, softswitching, and pure VoIP, etc. Different telecom suppliers developed different product solution to implement these. Inter-operation is still limited by proprietary techonologies. the design of these products differs greatly. usually, a company will need to stick to a supplier for core solution.
Looking years ahead, IP is undoubtfully the direction to go. VoIP's low hardware cost, high bandwidth efficiecy, and universally availability will make it a winner. Actually, enterprises has been switching their legacy telephony technology to the new IP-based solutions stably over the past few years, but the telco, especially in countries like Canada, are slack behind evolution for various reasons. there are economics, and some enabling technologies, such as ENUM, are still under experiment.

Yup. By now there will be hardly anybody will argue that -mikesmith(老猫); 2005-6-15 (#2347774@0)

what is the dominant provider in the ISP level and also enterprise level ? -beech(beech); 2005-6-15 (#2347812@0)

I am not so sure for ISP.... For enterprise, both Cisco and Avaya claim the No. 1 in the VoIP line shipped. Who is lying? -mikesmith(老猫); 2005-6-15 {1463} (#2348390@0)
本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Avaya gives better migration path as it is a TDM provider and it is a hybrid solution in nature. It is based on H.323 and H.248. Also it claims to support SIP and use its flagship 8700 as a feature application provider in the SIP environment.

Cisco comes from the data world and its CallManager is built on Win2K.For years it is saying to have a Linux version. I don't mean CME here. But it either way it will piss off some poeple. CallManager is really good for our IT guys and easier to get a taste of. I am saying it is easy as it is not for many people. It uses SCCP when its phone talks to CallManager. It also has a SIP Proxy server. But feature wise is not so great. I see lot of successful CallManager experts were PBX experts before.

3Com, Siemens, Alcatel are all players in this field. 3Com is like Cisco, coming from the data world. It was kind of warm a few years ago. Now it is going nowhere. Alcatel seems pretty strong in European market.

Nortel is a late player in the enterprise VoIP market. I hope it is not too late. I am not saying it does not have great products - but BCM family is not among them. It seem Nortel lacks will and means in its marketing. But in north america, its Meridian was so successful and has huge installation base. It should find its way back. It is losing market share now to Avaya and Cisco, who knows for tomorrow. But as long as people does not have faith in its finacial status, it is a hard sell.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net

It also depends how large is the enterprise -iambigcat(cat); 2005-6-15 {734} (#2348523@0)
I know Government BC is leveraging Nortel CS2Kc (Succession) solution to migrate its legacy TDM network.

Nortel has a very interesting SIP product MCS5200 (former name is IMS), It has some good features. I haven't touched it for a year and half, don't know how it is doing now. It's based on SUN Solaris boxes, and has interface with TDM through either CS2K or PBX. When I was working on it, the problem of it is too expensive, not only the server side, but also the IP phones and IADs.

BCM is basically a IP PBX. Higher level product from Nortel is CS1K. Both BCM and CS1K use H323.

If Nortel wasn't beat by its accounting problem and could focus on development/marketing, it should have a large share on VoIP market.

Thanks. Cisco lost a lot of deals because it cannot provide a migration path - all digital phones have to be thrown away. And if Canadian government cannot support Nortel, who will? -mikesmith(老猫); 2005-6-15 {137} (#2348572@0)
If I have a chance, I'd like to learn Nortel's SIP product, seems interesting... I don't like BCM family, it does not have a structure

but if lower entry cost is the first concern, TDM solution may fit your budgets quite well. -dotod(Hewllet Greger); 2005-6-15 {266} (#2347848@0)
Many companies are replacing their legacy infrastructures, liquidation of used equipments can actually be an opportunity to acquire low cost telecom gears. SIP with packets is nice technology, but when it comes to voice quality, it still can't match the TDM trunks.

With the right QoS support, voice quality should be similar between TDM and IP based system. This can be verified with MOS value -mikesmith(老猫); 2005-6-15 (#2348482@0)

Just find a good article dealing with that topic. -dotod(Hewllet Greger); 2005-6-16 (#2349302@0)

That's a good article. There is no systematic way and toolset to ensure end to end QoS. It requires expertise in the design and architecture. -mikesmith(老猫); 2005-6-16 {92} (#2349769@0)
However, with the experience, it can be done and have been achieved in some implementations.
http://nwm.networkingpipeline.com/trends/161501006

indeed. thanks. -dotod(Hewllet Greger); 2005-6-16 (#2349964@0)

以前在国内做过一个政府网，话音，视频会议加数据三网合一，拿北电7400作的. -iambigcat(cat); 2005-6-16 {297} (#2350248@0)
话音和视频的效果非常好。以前北电真是有很多好产品和技术。在74上把话音，视频封装成cell(私有协议),数据封装成frame，再加上队列机制，效果就很好了。

我看cisco只有队列机制，如果借鉴一下nortel的做法，话音和视频能以cell封装的话，QOS能提高很多。

相信随着技术进步，保证IP网里话音视频的QOS是完全可能的。

I never touched 7400. Good to know. -mikesmith(老猫); 2005-6-16 {435} (#2350723@0)
Does that "cell" refer to ATM? If that is the case, it is connection oriented and all the service parametres can be setup before communication channel is up, which will provide best quality for sure. ATM in design is for multi-services.

However, IP is best effort in its nature... QoS is imposed afterwards...That's why it is difficult to control.....The challenge now is how to ensure QoS end to end in a pure IP network......

no, not ATM. that cell is nortel's encapsulation of voice/video traffic. It's not a standard protocol. -iambigcat(cat); 2005-6-16 (#2350854@0)

Thanks. Good to know again. -mikesmith(老猫); 2005-6-16 (#2350882@0)
PP 7400 framework is based on ATM technology. Good product, but...那个政府是海关吗？ -su27(和稀泥); 2005-7-20 (#2408277@0)

@Florida

That's a good article. There is no systematic way and toolset to ensure end to end QoS. It requires expertise in the design and architecture.

Replies, comments and Discussions:

More Topics