Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > VOIP > cisco 831 and callmanger VOIP

Reply
Thread Tools

cisco 831 and callmanger VOIP

 
 
Jimmyzshack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2003
anyone have a remote office with like 10 people using VPN to your corp
office using cisco's 831 router? If so could you answer a couple of
questions for me.

Are you using g.711 for the calls?
is the call quailty good?
What speed internet conections are you using up/down?

We are looking at putting a remote office of 10 people on a cisco 831 vpn
to our corp office connect to the internet with sdsl 1.5u/1.5d.
thanks for any replies.

e-mail:

jimmy dot riley at vericore dot com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
aaaa
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2003
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk65...800b6710.shtml

no~ never use g.711, because the B/W consumption is 64K/Per Channel,

Compression Method
Bit Rate (kbps)
MOS Score
Compression Delay (ms)

G.711 PCM
64
4.1
0.75

G.726 ADPCM
32
3.85
1

G.728 LD-CELP
16
3.61
3 to 5

G.729 CS-ACELP
8
3.92
10

G.729 x 2 Encodings
8
3.27
10

G.729 x 3 Encodings
8
2.68
10

G.729a CS-ACELP
8
3.7
10

G.723.1 MP-MLQ
6.3
3.9
30

G.723.1 ACELP
5.3
3.65
30





"Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Xns94379ED49DDB1JimmyRileyvericoreco@140.99.9 9.130...
> anyone have a remote office with like 10 people using VPN to your corp
> office using cisco's 831 router? If so could you answer a couple of
> questions for me.
>
> Are you using g.711 for the calls?
> is the call quailty good?
> What speed internet conections are you using up/down?
>
> We are looking at putting a remote office of 10 people on a cisco 831 vpn
> to our corp office connect to the internet with sdsl 1.5u/1.5d.
> thanks for any replies.
>
> e-mail:
>
> jimmy dot riley at vericore dot com



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Arcaidy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2003
Why say never?
Yes it uses a lot of bandwidth, but there are situations where it's better
to use that 729. You list the other Codec's, but they are not compatible
with Cisco's call manager. (Unless I am wrong).
711 is alot more forgiving if you drop a few packets every now and then. You
drop a few packets with 711 and there's a good chance you'll never hear it.
With 729, you will notice something. You can also hear the difference when
talking to someone within the same network. 711 sounds much clearer. But, I
can't tell the difference once it goes outside the network.
He has a full T up and down. Averaging 80Kbs per call, with everyone one the
phone, you still have half of your bandwidth available.

Put in some kind of QOS and I think you'll be fine. We have LLQ on ours and
it does pretty good.

Have you thought about putting in a 17XX or 26XX and putting in some FXO
cards?
You could just have control data for the phones going across the network and
have the actual traffic going out the local gateways.
You could still have inter office calling go across the net.


Arcaidy.



"aaaa" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bpg2rm$(E-Mail Removed)...
>

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk65...note09186a0080
0b6710.shtml
>
> no~ never use g.711, because the B/W consumption is 64K/Per Channel,
>
> Compression Method
> Bit Rate (kbps)
> MOS Score
> Compression Delay (ms)
>
> G.711 PCM
> 64
> 4.1
> 0.75
>
> G.726 ADPCM
> 32
> 3.85
> 1
>
> G.728 LD-CELP
> 16
> 3.61
> 3 to 5
>
> G.729 CS-ACELP
> 8
> 3.92
> 10
>
> G.729 x 2 Encodings
> 8
> 3.27
> 10
>
> G.729 x 3 Encodings
> 8
> 2.68
> 10
>
> G.729a CS-ACELP
> 8
> 3.7
> 10
>
> G.723.1 MP-MLQ
> 6.3
> 3.9
> 30
>
> G.723.1 ACELP
> 5.3
> 3.65
> 30
>
>
>
>
>
> "Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Xns94379ED49DDB1JimmyRileyvericoreco@140.99.9 9.130...
> > anyone have a remote office with like 10 people using VPN to your corp
> > office using cisco's 831 router? If so could you answer a couple of
> > questions for me.
> >
> > Are you using g.711 for the calls?
> > is the call quailty good?
> > What speed internet conections are you using up/down?
> >
> > We are looking at putting a remote office of 10 people on a cisco 831

vpn
> > to our corp office connect to the internet with sdsl 1.5u/1.5d.
> > thanks for any replies.
> >
> > e-mail:
> >
> > jimmy dot riley at vericore dot com

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Jimmyzshack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2003

Arcaidy, how many people do you have at your remote office? Are you
doing VPN? What is the bandwidth speed on the remote office? thanks,

All calls from this office will be long distance so we where just going
to use the 831 back to the corp office to go out over our voice T-1's.
Within a year they will be up to 20 people so we would be a voice t-1
out at there location and just use the 831 (are maybe get a 17xx in the
first place) for office to office calls.

G.711 is the only thing the exec want to use b/c of the good voice
quailty, they will pay more for bandwidth if needed to use it, but .729
is ok for office to office calls.
 
Reply With Quote
 
aaaa
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2003
Hi Arcaidy,

Yes, you are right, suppose G711 is much clear than the other Codec's,
but . . . um . . . .in the live situation, I can't hear the difference.

I'm always use G723r63, it's good! ^_^

putting in a FXO or FXS card into 17XX or 26XX is a good idea, but
expensive, I will prefer some Analog GW have FXS or FXO ports X 2,
it's much cheaper.


"Arcaidy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:N_Oub.25075$Ro5.17415@fed1read07...
> Why say never?
> Yes it uses a lot of bandwidth, but there are situations where it's better
> to use that 729. You list the other Codec's, but they are not compatible
> with Cisco's call manager. (Unless I am wrong).
> 711 is alot more forgiving if you drop a few packets every now and then.

You
> drop a few packets with 711 and there's a good chance you'll never hear

it.
> With 729, you will notice something. You can also hear the difference when
> talking to someone within the same network. 711 sounds much clearer. But,

I
> can't tell the difference once it goes outside the network.
> He has a full T up and down. Averaging 80Kbs per call, with everyone one

the
> phone, you still have half of your bandwidth available.
>
> Put in some kind of QOS and I think you'll be fine. We have LLQ on ours

and
> it does pretty good.
>
> Have you thought about putting in a 17XX or 26XX and putting in some FXO
> cards?
> You could just have control data for the phones going across the network

and
> have the actual traffic going out the local gateways.
> You could still have inter office calling go across the net.
>
>
> Arcaidy.
>
>
>
> "aaaa" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:bpg2rm$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >

>

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk65...note09186a0080
> 0b6710.shtml
> >
> > no~ never use g.711, because the B/W consumption is 64K/Per Channel,
> >
> > Compression Method
> > Bit Rate (kbps)
> > MOS Score
> > Compression Delay (ms)
> >
> > G.711 PCM
> > 64
> > 4.1
> > 0.75
> >
> > G.726 ADPCM
> > 32
> > 3.85
> > 1
> >
> > G.728 LD-CELP
> > 16
> > 3.61
> > 3 to 5
> >
> > G.729 CS-ACELP
> > 8
> > 3.92
> > 10
> >
> > G.729 x 2 Encodings
> > 8
> > 3.27
> > 10
> >
> > G.729 x 3 Encodings
> > 8
> > 2.68
> > 10
> >
> > G.729a CS-ACELP
> > 8
> > 3.7
> > 10
> >
> > G.723.1 MP-MLQ
> > 6.3
> > 3.9
> > 30
> >
> > G.723.1 ACELP
> > 5.3
> > 3.65
> > 30
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:Xns94379ED49DDB1JimmyRileyvericoreco@140.99.9 9.130...
> > > anyone have a remote office with like 10 people using VPN to your corp
> > > office using cisco's 831 router? If so could you answer a couple of
> > > questions for me.
> > >
> > > Are you using g.711 for the calls?
> > > is the call quailty good?
> > > What speed internet conections are you using up/down?
> > >
> > > We are looking at putting a remote office of 10 people on a cisco 831

> vpn
> > > to our corp office connect to the internet with sdsl 1.5u/1.5d.
> > > thanks for any replies.
> > >
> > > e-mail:
> > >
> > > jimmy dot riley at vericore dot com

> >
> >

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Arcaidy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-20-2003
In a "live" situation, I can hear the differnence. Like I stated above, from
IP phone to IP phone, I can hear the difference between 711 and 729. As
others I work can as well. IP phone to Analog phone, I can't hear the
difference.
I think something that is missing here is that I beleive JimmyZ is running a
Cisco Call Manager installation. The only supported Codec's are 711 and 729.
That goes for the analog gateways as well. You can get the ATA'a, but that
does not solve the FXO issue.
I guess it doesn't really matter now anyway since he's going to send
everything over IP.






"aaaa" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bpgvpq$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi Arcaidy,
>
> Yes, you are right, suppose G711 is much clear than the other Codec's,
> but . . . um . . . .in the live situation, I can't hear the difference.
>
> I'm always use G723r63, it's good! ^_^
>
> putting in a FXO or FXS card into 17XX or 26XX is a good idea, but
> expensive, I will prefer some Analog GW have FXS or FXO ports X 2,
> it's much cheaper.
>
>
> "Arcaidy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:N_Oub.25075$Ro5.17415@fed1read07...
> > Why say never?
> > Yes it uses a lot of bandwidth, but there are situations where it's

better
> > to use that 729. You list the other Codec's, but they are not

compatible
> > with Cisco's call manager. (Unless I am wrong).
> > 711 is alot more forgiving if you drop a few packets every now and then.

> You
> > drop a few packets with 711 and there's a good chance you'll never hear

> it.
> > With 729, you will notice something. You can also hear the difference

when
> > talking to someone within the same network. 711 sounds much clearer.

But,
> I
> > can't tell the difference once it goes outside the network.
> > He has a full T up and down. Averaging 80Kbs per call, with everyone one

> the
> > phone, you still have half of your bandwidth available.
> >
> > Put in some kind of QOS and I think you'll be fine. We have LLQ on ours

> and
> > it does pretty good.
> >
> > Have you thought about putting in a 17XX or 26XX and putting in some FXO
> > cards?
> > You could just have control data for the phones going across the network

> and
> > have the actual traffic going out the local gateways.
> > You could still have inter office calling go across the net.
> >
> >
> > Arcaidy.
> >
> >
> >
> > "aaaa" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:bpg2rm$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > >

> >

>

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk65...note09186a0080
> > 0b6710.shtml
> > >
> > > no~ never use g.711, because the B/W consumption is 64K/Per Channel,
> > >
> > > Compression Method
> > > Bit Rate (kbps)
> > > MOS Score
> > > Compression Delay (ms)
> > >
> > > G.711 PCM
> > > 64
> > > 4.1
> > > 0.75
> > >
> > > G.726 ADPCM
> > > 32
> > > 3.85
> > > 1
> > >
> > > G.728 LD-CELP
> > > 16
> > > 3.61
> > > 3 to 5
> > >
> > > G.729 CS-ACELP
> > > 8
> > > 3.92
> > > 10
> > >
> > > G.729 x 2 Encodings
> > > 8
> > > 3.27
> > > 10
> > >
> > > G.729 x 3 Encodings
> > > 8
> > > 2.68
> > > 10
> > >
> > > G.729a CS-ACELP
> > > 8
> > > 3.7
> > > 10
> > >
> > > G.723.1 MP-MLQ
> > > 6.3
> > > 3.9
> > > 30
> > >
> > > G.723.1 ACELP
> > > 5.3
> > > 3.65
> > > 30
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > > news:Xns94379ED49DDB1JimmyRileyvericoreco@140.99.9 9.130...
> > > > anyone have a remote office with like 10 people using VPN to your

corp
> > > > office using cisco's 831 router? If so could you answer a couple of
> > > > questions for me.
> > > >
> > > > Are you using g.711 for the calls?
> > > > is the call quailty good?
> > > > What speed internet conections are you using up/down?
> > > >
> > > > We are looking at putting a remote office of 10 people on a cisco

831
> > vpn
> > > > to our corp office connect to the internet with sdsl 1.5u/1.5d.
> > > > thanks for any replies.
> > > >
> > > > e-mail:
> > > >
> > > > jimmy dot riley at vericore dot com
> > >
> > >

> >
> >

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Arcaidy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-20-2003
We don't use them for remote offices yet. We use them for home offices.
Currently, there is only a phone and computer behind each. We use them over
Basic DSL and cable modem. We VPN using EZVPN on the router. I have set the
interface to 1 meg on the internet side. Then configured LLQ. I allowed
enough for 2 calls and then 16k for control. Seems to work well. I was able
to test with a call, downloading a couple large files from cisco. Was
pulling down over a Meg, made a few phone calls and all worked well. There
was a bit delay with calling a number, but the actual call worked fine.
One thing we are looking at is putting a DSL and ISDN card in a 1700 so we
could have basic failover. (if the DSL link went down, the ISDN would come
up as a failover) You may want to test with 729. I doubt very much that an
end user would be able to tell the difference.
You can put call manager express on the 1700 also. It would support up to 24
phones. It's just another option.





"Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Xns9438933AE2574JimmyRileyvericoreco@140.99.9 9.130...
>
> Arcaidy, how many people do you have at your remote office? Are you
> doing VPN? What is the bandwidth speed on the remote office? thanks,
>
> All calls from this office will be long distance so we where just going
> to use the 831 back to the corp office to go out over our voice T-1's.
> Within a year they will be up to 20 people so we would be a voice t-1
> out at there location and just use the 831 (are maybe get a 17xx in the
> first place) for office to office calls.
>
> G.711 is the only thing the exec want to use b/c of the good voice
> quailty, they will pay more for bandwidth if needed to use it, but .729
> is ok for office to office calls.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Jimmyzshack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-20-2003
Thanks for the input. We are looking into CME but Cisco told me it'll be
march of next year before CME and CCM will talk to each other over h323.
Also this is a sales and collections office so the have phone time they
have to make and i have to be able to to track it. I have a callaccounting
software at the corp office that does it but i don't think it will work
with CME. I plan on using EZVPN and "mode network-extension" the 831 and
LLQ. Do you need the isp to do anything to use LLQ or does the routers do
all of that?

"Arcaidy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> We don't use them for remote offices yet. We use them for home
> offices. Currently, there is only a phone and computer behind each. We
> use them over Basic DSL and cable modem. We VPN using EZVPN on the
> router. I have set the interface to 1 meg on the internet side. Then
> configured LLQ. I allowed enough for 2 calls and then 16k for control.
> Seems to work well. I was able to test with a call, downloading a
> couple large files from cisco. Was pulling down over a Meg, made a few
> phone calls and all worked well. There was a bit delay with calling a
> number, but the actual call worked fine. One thing we are looking at
> is putting a DSL and ISDN card in a 1700 so we could have basic
> failover. (if the DSL link went down, the ISDN would come up as a
> failover) You may want to test with 729. I doubt very much that an end
> user would be able to tell the difference. You can put call manager
> express on the 1700 also. It would support up to 24 phones. It's just
> another option.
>
>
>
>
>
> "Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Xns9438933AE2574JimmyRileyvericoreco@140.99.9 9.130...
>>
>> Arcaidy, how many people do you have at your remote office? Are you
>> doing VPN? What is the bandwidth speed on the remote office? thanks,
>>
>> All calls from this office will be long distance so we where just
>> going to use the 831 back to the corp office to go out over our voice
>> T-1's. Within a year they will be up to 20 people so we would be a
>> voice t-1 out at there location and just use the 831 (are maybe get a
>> 17xx in the first place) for office to office calls.
>>
>> G.711 is the only thing the exec want to use b/c of the good voice
>> quailty, they will pay more for bandwidth if needed to use it, but
>> .729 is ok for office to office calls.

>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
Arcaidy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-20-2003
I'm not sure how call accounting would work on CME. That's an interesting
point though.
The ISP has nothing to do with QOS. I'm willing to bet that the only thing
there willing to offer in that department is "best effort".
You'll comfigure LLQ on both of your routers.

I'm thinking you are in Florida... If I am wrong, sorry.
But if you are and you are in Bell Souths area, they have a service they
offer that put traffic on thier private network.
Maybe be something to look at. You wouldn't have to compete with "internet"
traffic and I think they off better SLA's. Current DSL here only comes with
a 72 hour SLA.
Thats unacceptable to some. Also, it would get rid of the need for VPN. It's
built more like a Frame relay network. Kinda like a point to point.

Arcaidy


"Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Xns943942C4BAC95jimmyzshackyahoocom@216.168.3 .44...
> Thanks for the input. We are looking into CME but Cisco told me it'll be
> march of next year before CME and CCM will talk to each other over h323.
> Also this is a sales and collections office so the have phone time they
> have to make and i have to be able to to track it. I have a callaccounting
> software at the corp office that does it but i don't think it will work
> with CME. I plan on using EZVPN and "mode network-extension" the 831 and
> LLQ. Do you need the isp to do anything to use LLQ or does the routers do
> all of that?
>
> "Arcaidy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:(E-Mail Removed):
>
> > We don't use them for remote offices yet. We use them for home
> > offices. Currently, there is only a phone and computer behind each. We
> > use them over Basic DSL and cable modem. We VPN using EZVPN on the
> > router. I have set the interface to 1 meg on the internet side. Then
> > configured LLQ. I allowed enough for 2 calls and then 16k for control.
> > Seems to work well. I was able to test with a call, downloading a
> > couple large files from cisco. Was pulling down over a Meg, made a few
> > phone calls and all worked well. There was a bit delay with calling a
> > number, but the actual call worked fine. One thing we are looking at
> > is putting a DSL and ISDN card in a 1700 so we could have basic
> > failover. (if the DSL link went down, the ISDN would come up as a
> > failover) You may want to test with 729. I doubt very much that an end
> > user would be able to tell the difference. You can put call manager
> > express on the 1700 also. It would support up to 24 phones. It's just
> > another option.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:Xns9438933AE2574JimmyRileyvericoreco@140.99.9 9.130...
> >>
> >> Arcaidy, how many people do you have at your remote office? Are you
> >> doing VPN? What is the bandwidth speed on the remote office? thanks,
> >>
> >> All calls from this office will be long distance so we where just
> >> going to use the 831 back to the corp office to go out over our voice
> >> T-1's. Within a year they will be up to 20 people so we would be a
> >> voice t-1 out at there location and just use the 831 (are maybe get a
> >> 17xx in the first place) for office to office calls.
> >>
> >> G.711 is the only thing the exec want to use b/c of the good voice
> >> quailty, they will pay more for bandwidth if needed to use it, but
> >> .729 is ok for office to office calls.

> >
> >

>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Jimmyzshack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-20-2003
We are looking at using Covads SDSL. They have a pretty good SLA. SDSL
24 hour and 110 millisecond average. We are in the New Orleans area the
office will be in AZ, From what i can tell at least here the bell's only
offer ADSL which the upload speed is not fast enough for more than 2 or
3 people. Thanks for the LLQ info i've got to do some reading on that.
Meeting with Cisco next week we'll see what kind of setup they came up
with.


"Arcaidy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:ZT4vb.22127$6G3.9301@fed1read06:

> I'm not sure how call accounting would work on CME. That's an
> interesting point though.
> The ISP has nothing to do with QOS. I'm willing to bet that the only
> thing there willing to offer in that department is "best effort".
> You'll comfigure LLQ on both of your routers.
>
> I'm thinking you are in Florida... If I am wrong, sorry.
> But if you are and you are in Bell Souths area, they have a service
> they offer that put traffic on thier private network.
> Maybe be something to look at. You wouldn't have to compete with
> "internet" traffic and I think they off better SLA's. Current DSL here
> only comes with a 72 hour SLA.
> Thats unacceptable to some. Also, it would get rid of the need for
> VPN. It's built more like a Frame relay network. Kinda like a point
> to point.
>
> Arcaidy
>
>
> "Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Xns943942C4BAC95jimmyzshackyahoocom@216.168.3 .44...
>> Thanks for the input. We are looking into CME but Cisco told me it'll
>> be march of next year before CME and CCM will talk to each other over
>> h323. Also this is a sales and collections office so the have phone
>> time they have to make and i have to be able to to track it. I have a
>> callaccounting software at the corp office that does it but i don't
>> think it will work with CME. I plan on using EZVPN and "mode
>> network-extension" the 831 and LLQ. Do you need the isp to do
>> anything to use LLQ or does the routers do all of that?
>>
>> "Arcaidy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>> news:(E-Mail Removed):
>>
>> > We don't use them for remote offices yet. We use them for home
>> > offices. Currently, there is only a phone and computer behind each.
>> > We use them over Basic DSL and cable modem. We VPN using EZVPN on
>> > the router. I have set the interface to 1 meg on the internet side.
>> > Then configured LLQ. I allowed enough for 2 calls and then 16k for
>> > control. Seems to work well. I was able to test with a call,
>> > downloading a couple large files from cisco. Was pulling down over
>> > a Meg, made a few phone calls and all worked well. There was a bit
>> > delay with calling a number, but the actual call worked fine. One
>> > thing we are looking at is putting a DSL and ISDN card in a 1700 so
>> > we could have basic failover. (if the DSL link went down, the ISDN
>> > would come up as a failover) You may want to test with 729. I doubt
>> > very much that an end user would be able to tell the difference.
>> > You can put call manager express on the 1700 also. It would support
>> > up to 24 phones. It's just another option.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Jimmyzshack" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> > news:Xns9438933AE2574JimmyRileyvericoreco@140.99.9 9.130...
>> >>
>> >> Arcaidy, how many people do you have at your remote office? Are
>> >> you doing VPN? What is the bandwidth speed on the remote office?
>> >> thanks,
>> >>
>> >> All calls from this office will be long distance so we where just
>> >> going to use the 831 back to the corp office to go out over our
>> >> voice T-1's. Within a year they will be up to 20 people so we
>> >> would be a voice t-1 out at there location and just use the 831
>> >> (are maybe get a 17xx in the first place) for office to office
>> >> calls.
>> >>
>> >> G.711 is the only thing the exec want to use b/c of the good voice
>> >> quailty, they will pay more for bandwidth if needed to use it, but
>> >> .729 is ok for office to office calls.
>> >
>> >

>>

>
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Callmanger Ring Tones Daniel Prinsloo - www.CherryFive.com Cisco 1 06-29-2005 04:42 PM
Sipura 3000 via Cisco 831 on Voicepulse VOIP Fred Atkinson Cisco 1 06-20-2005 11:02 AM
VOIP Phone on Cisco 831 Fred Atkinson Cisco 0 10-24-2004 12:24 AM
New to callmanger, simple question RatM Cisco 0 05-04-2004 10:18 PM
Can this be done cisco 831 vpn into another 831? Jimmyzshack Cisco 1 11-19-2003 09:09 PM



Advertisments