Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in posts
Search in pages

PABX System

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 25 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #11930 Reply
    Call Center Manager
    Guest

    Which is a good buy for PABX system? apart from Avaya? Anyone have comments on Ericson or any suggestion?

    #11931 Reply
    SANJAY BANGROO
    Guest

    IS IT FOR A CALL CENTER PLATFORM OR FOR YOUR OFFICE COMMUNICATION ??

    #11932 Reply
    Call Center Manager
    Guest

    It is for call center platform, Sanjay.

    #11933 Reply
    SANJAY BANGROO
    Guest

    The best choices ,in order, are AVAYA , ALCATEL and NORTEL.
    If u require any more clarifications do revert back to me.

    Sanjay Bangroo

    #11934 Reply
    Tim Harvey
    Guest

    To save yourself allot of money and headache, you may want to look at the new VoIP (Voice Over IP) options. It will not only save you money on the equipment, but the compression rates for an IP call versus a standard voice call saves you about 5x’s the bandwidth for your IPLC requirements. The quality is almost identical to that of a traditional voice call.
    I have implemented these solutions and would be happy to discuss this with you.

    Tim Harvey

    #11935 Reply
    SANJAY BANGROO
    Guest

    Hi All ,

    Find below a brief comparison of various voice technologies.

    PLEASE REMEMBER FOR A PUR VOICE NETWORK TDM IS THE BEST CHOICE IN TERMS OF QOS, BANDWIDTH EFFICIENCY ETC. USING VARIOUS COMPRESSION ALGORITHMS .
    G729A BEING THE BEST CHOICE FOR A PURE VOICE NETWORK.

    Cheers !!!!!
    Sanjay

    NETWORK DELAY AND JITTER
    Key ingredient for good voice is
    low delay
    Delay can be measured as
    Average length of time for packet to move

    Variability in the arrival of packets
    A jitter buffer nullifies the effect of variation
    Latency is sum of above two
    A latency of 200 – 250 msec makes a bad voice
    Example consider network with 50 ms avvg delay but some part goes as high as 200-250 msec
    A Jitter buffer of 10 msec will have low delay but will miss delayed packets
    A jitter buffer of 200 msec will compensate for late packets but increase latecy
    Hence Dynamic Jitter Buffering is a must criterion for Bandwidth Managers

    COMPARING TECHNOLOGIES
    TDM
    Quality of Voice : HIGHEST
    Provides predictable and consitent quality of voice
    Does not suffer from effects of Latency, Jitter

    Bandwidth Efficiency :
    Very High for a pure voice network
    Poor for a multiservice network
    Cost : Cheapest
    Effictive support for Multiservices: Poor

    FRAME RELAY
    Quality of Voice :HIGH
    Provides very good quality of voice under optimal conditions
    Does not lower efficiency on implementing solutions for Latency, Jitter

    Bandwidth Efficiency :
    High for a pure voice network
    Very efficient for a voice/ data network
    Cost :Medium
    Effictive support for Multiservices: Good

    VOIP
    Quality of Voice : Optimal to poor
    Provides very good quality of voice under optimal conditions
    lowest efficiency on implementing solutions for Latency, Jitter

    Bandwidth Efficiency :
    Very Low for a pure voice network
    Not very efficient for a voice/ data network
    Most efficient for data Networks
    Cost : Medium
    Effictive support for Multiservices: Low

    TECHNOLOGY FOR PURE VOICE NETWORK
    Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation is not an issue
    Voice Quality is of paramount importance
    Bandwidth efficiency is significantly important

    TDM is the best choice to meet the above requirement

    TECHNOLOGY FOR VOICE /DATA NETWORK
    Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation is an important issue
    Voice Quality is of significant importance
    Bandwidth efficiency is paramount importance important
    FRAME RELAY is the best choice to meet the above

    DELAY OR LATENCY
    Caused By:
    algorithmic processing delay
    frame delay (size of frame)
    transmission delay
    General Rule:
    Delay approaching 32 ms requires echo cancellation
    Delay is a function of transport technology also

    Choice of Technology has bearing on

    1.Bandwidth Efficiency
    2.Delay
    3.Jitter

    AND HENCE ON VOICE QUALITY

    Choice of Technology is also governed by
    Type of traffic running viz voice only or multiservices
    Whether Dynamic Bandwidth allocation desired
    QOS Requirement in multiservices

    SOLUTIONS FOR JITTER
    Variation in delay for Packet voice due to Network Congestion

    Does not apply to Circuit Switched TDM

    Happens when a large packet has already transmitted resulting in a voice packet waiting
    Solved using techniques like fragmentation etc.

    BUT
    EFFECTS OF FRAGMENTATION ON EFFICIENCY
    Fragmentation results in creation of large no. of data packets
    Each packet has to have a packet overhead
    Packet overhead of FR is much lesser than IP

    IP overhead reduces WAN Efficiency by 10 – 15 %
    FR overhead reduces by 2-4 %

    COMPARING PACKET TECHNOLOGIES ON QOS :
    FR offers higher levels of prioritization

    ATM offers highest levels

    IP is very limited in this aspect

    TECHNOLOGY FOR PURE VOICE NETWORK
    Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation is not an issue
    Voice Quality is of paramount importance
    Bandwidth efficiency is significantly important

    TDM is the best choice to meet the above requirement

    SANJAY BANGROO

    #11936 Reply
    Neil
    Guest

    Good info Sanjay!

    I’m looking at a DTS system myself Ive heard these are good. Do you know who makes these?

    Also I’m thinking about Avaya…but I dont know specifically what I need. I’ll have about 5 outbound callers calling on home consumers for roofing, painting and associated odd jobs. We will eventually grow to 15 in the next 18 months. What kind of Avaya phone system would I want? How does it compare to DTS? Are there any specific features I will want to look for?? I wanna stay lean!!!

    Thank you!!

    #11937 Reply
    SANJAY BANGROO
    Guest

    For outbound dialing u can go for an outbound dialer solution ( Hardware Based ) and u will not require any EPABX , AVAYA etc. since u are not having any inbound calls.
    Go for DAVOX (now CONCERTO) or MOSAIC .
    But these solutions are a bit expensive as such u can look for a local solution in your place.
    You will find many such non- branded solutions available in the local market. Just evaluate them.

    I dont know where u r based .
    Do let me know ?
    I am in INDIA and we have many such home grown solutions readily available here.

    Further , if u have a customer database and are into some sort of CRM then both can be integrated also and u can have a SCREEN POP-UP too once the call is answered by your customer.
    U can do without an AVAYA phone or the AVAYA switch .Just go for a non-properietary phone to save costs.

    In case u require any further info. feel free to write to me.

    Regards and Best wishes
    SANJAY BANGROO

    #11938 Reply
    SANJAY BANGROO
    Guest

    GIRISH AND SHAILENDAR .

    PLEASE GO THROUGH THE ABOVE ARTICLES AND MOST OF THE THINGS WILL BE CLEAR TO U.
    IN CASE OF ANY FURTHER QUERIES REVERT BACK TO ME.

    SANJAY BANGROO

    #11939 Reply
    rajiv
    Guest

    can someone suggest me a call logging solurtion other than Nice logger

    #11940 Reply
    Anuj
    Guest

    You can look at TeleSynergy for the PABX solution

    #11941 Reply
    SANJAY BANGROO
    Guest

    GO FOR POWER CONNECT

    #11942 Reply
    Sanjay Bhargava
    Guest

    Can we run FR over IPLC?
    The second question: How much overhead is going to be there? Passport 4460 mux from Nortel supports VoIP or VoFR and not TDM. Compared to using TDM mux like Kilomux, how much bandwidth is wasted if we go for VoFR on IPLC. Vendor say that 12.5Kbps per voice channel on FR. If we are buying a FR service from BT or others, this is fine as the overhead is not to our account and we will get the CIR committed to us. If we are deploying FR over our IPLC, the overhead of FR goes out of our bandwidth. Just like VoIP , VoFR has some overhead in carrying voice in pacet form. I think that this packet overhead is the extra 4.5 kbps on 8Kbps compressed voice. We will loose additional bandwidth for running FR on IPLC. Any idea bout it?

    #11943 Reply
    SANJAY BANGROO
    Guest

    Hi Sanjay,

    I think u really have hit the nail on the head and without any doubt u are ABSOLUTELY correct. There are packet overheads in case of VOIP as well as FR. The only difference is that for VOIP the packet overhead size is around 7 Kbps and for FR it is around 2Kbps,per 8Kbps compressed voice.

    PLEASE REMEMBER THE GOLDEN RULE :
    ‘FOR PURE VOICE NETWORK,TDM IS THE BEST SOLUTION’
    Let me explain and compare various technologies in a small tabular form and this will explain everything to u very clearly :

    BANDWIDTH EFFICIENCY COMPARISON
    (FOR A 64KBPS LINK )

    TDM VOFR VOIP
    CODEC B/W 8KBPS 8KBPS 8KBPS

    PACKET 2KBPS 7KBPS
    OVERHEAD

    TOTAL B/W 8KBPS 10KBPS 15KBPS

    LESS 6KBPS 9KBPS
    SILENCE

    NET AVG. 8KBPS 4KBPS 6KBPS
    B/W

    MAX. 8 6 4
    ACTIVE
    VOICE
    CHANNELS

    NETWORK DELAY AND JITTER
    Key ingredient for good voice is
    low delay
    Delay can be measured as
    Average length of time for packet to move

    Variability in the arrival of packets
    A jitter buffer nullifies the effect of variation
    Latency is sum of above two
    A latency of 200 – 250 msec makes a bad voice
    Example consider network with 50 ms avvg delay but some part goes as high as 200-250 msec
    A Jitter buffer of 10 msec will have low delay but will miss delayed packets
    A jitter buffer of 200 msec will compensate for late packets but increase latecy
    Hence Dynamic Jitter Buffering is a must criterion for Bandwidth Managers

    COMPARING TECHNOLOGIES
    TDM
    Quality of Voice : HIGHEST
    Provides predictable and consitent quality of voice
    Does not suffer from effects of Latency, Jitter

    Bandwidth Efficiency :
    Very High for a pure voice network
    Poor for a multiservice network
    Cost : Cheapest
    Effictive support for Multiservices: Poor

    FRAME RELAY
    Quality of Voice :HIGH
    Provides very good quality of voice under optimal conditions
    Does not lower efficiency on implementing solutions for Latency, Jitter

    Bandwidth Efficiency :
    High for a pure voice network
    Very efficient for a voice/ data network
    Cost :Medium
    Effictive support for Multiservices: Good

    VOIP
    Quality of Voice : Optimal to poor
    Provides very good quality of voice under optimal conditions
    lowest efficiency on implementing solutions for Latency, Jitter

    Bandwidth Efficiency :
    Very Low for a pure voice network
    Not very efficient for a voice/ data network
    Most efficient for data Networks
    Cost : Medium
    Effictive support for Multiservices: Low

    TECHNOLOGY FOR PURE VOICE NETWORK
    Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation is not an issue
    Voice Quality is of paramount importance
    Bandwidth efficiency is significantly important

    TDM is the best choice to meet the above requirement

    TECHNOLOGY FOR VOICE /DATA NETWORK
    Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation is an important issue
    Voice Quality is of significant importance
    Bandwidth efficiency is paramount importance important
    FRAME RELAY is the best choice to meet the above

    DELAY OR LATENCY
    Caused By:
    algorithmic processing delay
    frame delay (size of frame)
    transmission delay
    General Rule:
    Delay approaching 32 ms requires echo cancellation
    Delay is a function of transport technology also

    Choice of Technology has bearing on

    1.Bandwidth Efficiency
    2.Delay
    3.Jitter

    AND HENCE ON VOICE QUALITY

    Choice of Technology is also governed by
    Type of traffic running viz voice only or multiservices
    Whether Dynamic Bandwidth allocation desired
    QOS Requirement in multiservices

    SOLUTIONS FOR JITTER
    Variation in delay for Packet voice due to Network Congestion

    Does not apply to Circuit Switched TDM

    Happens when a large packet has already transmitted resulting in a voice packet waiting
    Solved using techniques like fragmentation etc.

    BUT
    EFFECTS OF FRAGMENTATION ON EFFICIENCY
    Fragmentation results in creation of large no. of data packets
    Each packet has to have a packet overhead
    Packet overhead of FR is much lesser than IP

    IP overhead reduces WAN Efficiency by 10 – 15 %
    FR overhead reduces by 2-4 %

    COMPARING PACKET TECHNOLOGIES ON QOS :
    FR offers higher levels of prioritization

    ATM offers highest levels

    IP is very limited in this aspect

    TECHNOLOGY FOR PURE VOICE NETWORK
    Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation is not an issue
    Voice Quality is of paramount importance
    Bandwidth efficiency is significantly important

    TDM is the best choice to meet the above requirement

    I hope I have answered all your queries. In case u require any further clarification or have more queries, please feel free to get in touch with me on sanjay_bangroo at Yaho.

    Cheers!!!!!!!
    Sanjay Bangroo

    #11944 Reply
    SANJAY BANGROO
    Guest

    Hi Mr. Bhargava ,

    The table has not come out aligned properly after submission of the article.

    In case u r not in a position to interpret the table ,
    contact me on SANJAY_BANGROO@Yahoo.com , and I will send u the details ,

    Cheers !!!!!!
    Sanjay

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 25 total)
Reply To: PABX System
Your information:




<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre class=""> <em> <strong> <del datetime="" cite=""> <ins datetime="" cite=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">