- This topic has 10 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 18 years, 2 months ago by Nikola to Mike.
15th July 2004 at 21:24 #27638Frank OhrtmanGuest
Which is the better gatekeeper: the Qunitum Tenor gatekeeper or the SysMaster Stand-Alone Gatekeeper?
Any good/bad experiences with these platforms?
Thanks in advance,
FrankO21st July 2004 at 08:56 #27639Teodor GeorgievGuest
I have worked with Tenor gatekeeper, but it is not so advanced as it is expected from a gatekeeper.
Better go with GnuGK or Acua (free of charge ones), or if you need a real gatekeeper with all the features one could need – look at MVTS (MERA).21st July 2004 at 12:18 #27640NonameGuest
The Quintum gatekeeper is very limited, with emphasis on the limited.
If you have devices that change I.P. and re-register, the quintum have a hard time following up, either give you a false double registration or no registration at all.
Also, the built in gatekeeper on the gateway is very limited on the number of devices that could handle.
A A400 could only registrer four devices, and does not tell you anything when it reach the maximun, only stop taking registrations.
Only use if for other quintum devices and only as a last resort.
Think of it as something that you got for free, and you got what you paid for.
Noname26th August 2004 at 18:37 #27641BobGuest
Don’t even think about buying VoiceMaster or SysMaster. You get screwed royally.
Buy anyting else or just through your money away, but don’t buy SysMaster.
Cheers,28th August 2004 at 05:10 #27642CM RahmanGuest
Why do you hate voicemaster? What kind of problem are you facing with it?31st August 2004 at 18:21 #27643Nikola for NonameGuest
Could you please tell me if Tenor with internal GK could be registred to other GK and in GK to GK mode and at same time have connection to other GW in GW to GW mode.
Presently I have connected my A800 to other GK and cannot accept any call from any other GW if this independently of GK. SO I am bounded to receiving or sending traffic only to one partner.
Any suggestions1st September 2004 at 15:39 #27644BobGuest
CM Rahman, This thing never worked properly since the first day we bought it. Why do you think I hate them so much? They refused to solve our problems when we had a support contract with them. Even though we had a 24/7 service still we would get an answer in a few days sometimes not at all.2nd September 2004 at 08:40 #27645DenisGuest
Reply to Bob and all others disappointed by their current billing system.
All, I can say is: Billing system is the most important part in your VoIP business. Obviously you need a change. Why don’t you check EyeBill billing system http://www.eyebill.net
contact me at: email@example.com
I am sure i can help.2nd September 2004 at 15:04 #27646CM RahmanGuest
Which part didn’t work? or is it sitting in your closet? Is the gatekeeper didn’t work? is it the billing system did’t work? is it the Credit Card authorization doesn’t work? Which part?
Thanks3rd September 2004 at 00:59 #27647Noname to NikolaGuest
Hello Nikola. You question is kind of confuse.
If you register your quintum to a external gatekeeper, the routing of all the OUTGOING calls is done via the gk.
That means that calls from the PSTN to the I.P. will be routed acording to the routes available to the gk.
On the incoming, from VOIP to PSTN, you should be able to receive calls normally.
Never tried that scenario, but I am willing to give it a try just to learn.
Did you have all the PSTN LAMpattern and LAMreplace fields done????
Now, the other mode of operation of the Quintum is using the “border element”
By using the “border element” , you are not registered to the other gk, but if the other equipment is a Quintum, they will “learn” each other routes.
The same effect of doing the registration, but keep workind independient one from each other
Best luck6th September 2004 at 12:03 #27648Nikola to MikeGuest
Setup for Term and Org is done OK, because GW working without any problem for destination which he is programmed.
At beginning I used Tenor only in GW to GW mode with Cisco.
Now I must go in GW to GK mode, because my partner is using Clarent for receiving and sending traffic.
So, now cannot receive traffic from GW-Cisco even I have him in my routing table. In addition I cannot send traffic to Cisco GW, based on Static routing table.
Conclusion, I MUST use ONLY Clarent GK partner for any type of traffic and cannot have contract with few more ITSP, where I can get better rates for some destinations and gain more traffic to my GW.
I hope that this explains my setup.
- The forum ‘Voice over IP’ is closed to new topics and replies.