|
 |
> Francois Labreque wrote:
>>> Checking online, it seems I can get to 24 or 48 port switch with
>
>>> 1. Since when does VoIP require PoE?
>>
>> Because you can power your phone through the ethernet cable. Unless
>> you want to have a separate power cord to connect the phone to the
>> wall outlet. Today's ISDN or POTS phones get a 48v DC power feed down
>> the phone cable. With VoIP, you either need to send juice on the
>> ethernet cable's unused pairs, or plug your phones in the wall.
>
> Mmm. My current digital phone has a seperate power cable...
Is you wall outlet connected to the generator? Hopefully, the ethernet
switch in the riser is. This way, IP phones can still work during
power outages.
>
>> PoE is also often used to power wireless antennas.
>
> Wireless = massive security hole = to be avoided at any cost.
The bit about wireless antennas wasn't specifically about your company.
In your settings, having a wap leak confidential information on
the street might be a bad idea, but there are lots of places where being
wired causes more problems. For example in big warehouses. Having
wireless barcode readers is very handy to find the box you're looking
for while stting in your forklift truck, rather than having to get out
and go to a wall mounted terminal, and there is very little of
information leakage since warehouses are natural faraday cages.
>
>>> 2. For that matter, since when does VoIP require any special hardware
>>> of any kind?
>>
>> Because sometimes people like to use actual phones, and actual phones
>> need electricity to work.
>> Because you need special hardware to be able to convert your internal
>> VoIP traffic to interface with the outside world's phone systems.
>> Because you need special hardware to be able to convert your fax
>> amchines, central alarm systems, key-card entry system, etc... that
>> still use analog modems to use your VoIP network.
>>
>> VoIP is a lot more stuff than just installing Skype on your PC.
>
> So why are we bothering to do all this stuff?
>
In your case? I have no idea. But as Sabrina mentions in the other
message, there are situations where it makes a whole lot of sense.
Our local school board cut their telco costs tenfold by getting rid of
all the phone lines - between 24 and 200 - in each of their 1300 schools
and going VoIP with only a pool of 600 lines at the head office.
My company has a whole floor dedicated to "mobile" employees who mostly
work from home, or on the road. Each one has his or her own phone
number, but when they actually do come in the office (or any of the
company's offices worldwide), they can just log into any of the IP
phones and they'll be reached like if it was _their_ desk.
> POTS may not be high-tech, but it *is* legally guaranteed to actually
> work properly...
>
>>> 3. You want to use VoIP? Um, *why*?? Do you just enjoy extra
>>> complexity, or is this because VoIP sounds all shiny and new and sexy
>>> and we should get with it?
>>
>> Because it cuts down on the amount of wiring than will go in the walls.
>> Because it cuts down on the number of phone lines coming in and out of
>> the building.
>> Because it can cut down on long distance calls.
>> etc...
>>
>> Yes, for the most part, migrating to VoIP in an existing office is
>> still a solution looking for a problem to fix, but in a new building,
>> the costs of going with VoIP today are often less than the costs of
>> building a separate telephony and data network.
>
> But we *are* building two seperate networks. (And then ditching one in a
> few months.)
>
> Seriously, there is nothing in that lot that looks like a win from where
> I'm sitting. Conceivably it's cheaper. But for that, you get mountains
> of unnecessary additional complexity. No thanks!
>
Not "additional" complexity. Just "different" complexity. Managing a
PBX and associated paraphernalia is not really that much simpler than
managing a VoIP system and its own set of gizmos and doodads.
Deciding today to buy VoIP-ready hardware is not necessarily a bad
decision. Yes, it's more expensive than buying switches that don't do
PoE, but it's a good idea to plan ahead a little bit. Just like you
were planning on getting Gig switches, even though there isn't a single
PC or server on the market today that can sustain gig throughput for
more than a few frames at a time.
>>> 4. So, let me get this straight. We're currently arranging a contract
>>> to spend tens of thousands of pounds to have our existing ISDN
>>> digital phone system moved to the new building, but "in the next year
>>> or two" you want to throw all that in the bin and move to VoIP? Are
>>> you mental?? You're telling us all this *now*?!?
>>
>> Ok, so you'd prefer to have to scrap the current network hardware ON
>> TOP of replacing the phone system in a few years?
>
> No - my point was, if you're going to use VoIP, why bother paying tens
> of thousands to set up a telephone system in the new building when it's
> about to become obsolete? (I suspect it's too late to change now; since
> nobody thought of telling me sooner...)
There are lots of reasons (besides shortsightedness - even if it's very,
very common!) why companies will invest in a temporary solution rather
than wait for the final one to be delivered. Especially when it comes
to moving people around. For example: sometimes, leases have to be
signed for extended periods of time, and the costs associated with
breaking a 10 year lease on a building might be greater than the cost of
ripping the PBX apart in 2 years.
This being said, I have no idea how your company is handling the move to
the new facilities and why it's taking the decisions it's taking, so I
can't vouch for their sanity, but I've been through enough office moves
to know that "Geee... I wish we'd thought of this last year" is usually
very expensive.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* sympatico.ca */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
