Re: VoIP, load balancing, and bonding: help pls

Discussion in 'UK VOIP' started by Gordon Henderson, Apr 21, 2008.

  1. In article <>,
    Jose <> wrote:
    >Hi All,
    >
    >In the case of home-office routers using 2 Internet connections, with
    >load balancing capacbilities, would the router normally:


    It's no-use asking us - we don't know what router you have. Far better
    to read the routers manual...

    >a) assign the VoIP call to the connection it judges better suited for
    >the purpose,


    And how would it gauge that metric?

    >b) assign the VoIP call to one of the connections randomly, as long as
    >they're both working, or
    >c) distribuite one call's data packets by the 2 connections,
    >considering their momentary actual speeds and availability??


    Read the fine manual?

    I'd suggest that the router would keep the same ADSL line going once a
    connection starts and not migrate it to the other line - that would have
    the effect of changing the source IP address which remote sites might
    not like too much (not to mention the ISP passing the data), so once a
    VoIP call starts, the router will keep data for that call down the same
    ADSL line for the duration of that call.

    I also suspect that handling SIP and NAT over a load balancing router
    might be "intersting" too ...

    >As for bonding, from what I've read so far, to start with you need 2
    >conections with the same ISP, both with the same username... (If your
    >ISP does not supply the bonding already)


    You need an ISP that supports it, and usually much more sophisticated
    ADSL modem/router(s) at your end...

    >And then, - again if your ISP does not supply bonding - apparently
    >most "common" and "afordable" routers can't handle it... I stand to be
    >correct as far as bonding's concerned, please.


    They may be able to do load balancing, which isn't bonding. With
    bonding, a single connection can run at double the speed, with load
    balancing, a single connection can only run at the speed of one line,
    but a 2nd connection can also run at line speed.

    I have to say, that what I'd rather have in a SOHO environment is 2
    separate router/modems, and put all the VoIP down one of them and all
    office data down the other. Saves any fuss and you don't need expensive
    load balancing routers either...

    And if you need more capacity, then add in a 3rd and have (say) incoming
    calls coming in one line, outgoing through the other, and general office
    data (web/email) down the third.

    I have one client setup this way. (3 ADSL connections) They're averaging
    2-3 concurrent incoming calls and slightly more outgoing calls, which is
    workable on a single good ADSL line, (830Kbps upload) but it's pushing
    it a bit IMO.

    Gordon
     
    Gordon Henderson, Apr 21, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In article <fuiipn$tv3$>,
    Pet - www.GymRatZ.co.uk <> wrote:
    >Gordon Henderson wrote:


    >> I have one client setup this way. (3 ADSL connections) They're averaging
    >> 2-3 concurrent incoming calls and slightly more outgoing calls, which is
    >> workable on a single good ADSL line, (830Kbps upload) but it's pushing
    >> it a bit IMO.

    >
    >have you seen this http://www.voipfone.co.uk/broadband.php
    >Not cheap but if it's as good as claimed then cheaper than an additional
    > ADSL connection.


    Yes, seen it. This particular client is out in the sticks and only gets
    400-500 Kb/sec upload speed though, and I resell Entanet ADSL who I've
    found to be excellent for VoIP ...

    The down-sides that my customers have pointed out with these more
    expensive ADSL packages is that it then become more expensive than ISDN2
    connections which I'm trying to persuade them to move away from. It does
    vary from provider to provider though - one I looked at was wanting £65
    a month for a "VoIP quality" ADSL line...

    So for a voipfone ADSL line at £45 a month plus a BT line at £12.50 a
    month costs £57.50 a month.. I can get an ISDN2 port (2 channels)
    for £27 a month, so 2 ports/4 channels for £54 a month...

    Try explaining the VoIP advantage to a small company at those levels
    who don't make many phone calls anyway... I've found it far easier to
    install a VoIP (asterisk) PBX that uses their exiting ISDN/POTS lines,
    then "upgrade" their ADSL line and then start to syphon off outgoing
    calls via VoIP (Which I make money on!) than to go the whole hog and
    move everything to VoIP.

    What I've found in some cases is that there's a good balance of
    traditional PSTN and VoIP to be made - sometimes, reduce the ISDN
    channel/port count after outgoing calls are being placed via VoIP, but
    keep enough boxes to handle incoming calls and a possible fall-back for
    outgoing calls. A lot depends on the customer though - if they are a
    busy call centre then they'll want to stick to their ISDN lines, so I
    can push VoIP for the work from home/remote office connectivity angle.

    Gordon
     
    Gordon Henderson, Apr 21, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <fuitbf$5tl$>,
    Pet - www.GymRatZ.co.uk <> wrote:
    >Gordon Henderson wrote:
    >
    >
    >> This particular client is out in the sticks and only gets
    >> 400-500 Kb/sec upload speed though, and I resell Entanet ADSL who I've
    >> found to be excellent for VoIP ...

    >
    >My Entanet PAYG rarely gives problems.
    >... then again, I'd probally never notice as as calls would just get
    >routed over UKonline if it went down.
    >:¬)
    >
    >>a voipfone ADSL line at £45 a month plus a BT line at £12.50 a
    >> month costs £57.50 a month.. I can get an ISDN2 port (2 channels)
    >> for £27 a month, so 2 ports/4 channels for £54 a month...

    >
    >I didn't realise ISDN was that price.


    You thought it was more or less?

    It's a shade over the cost of 2 analogue lines... Personally, I think it
    ought to be a shade cheaper, but there you go...

    The break-even for ISDN2 vs. ISDN30 is 8 channels - which oddly enough
    is the mimimum number of channels you can order ISDN30 with, although it
    all depends on what BT quote for the installation price, and if they
    want you to take the hit for them putting fibre into an area... )-:

    >Funilly enough.... the same price as it was way back in 1998 !!
    >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/the_company_file/164247.stm
    >:¬)


    Indeed!

    >For me, the pay-off comes from 99% of outgoing calls are to UK mobiles
    >which seem to range anywhere from 12p/min to 30p/min or some such stupid
    >rate, but with betamax prices being rediculously cheap to all uk mobile
    >networks and free calls to almost everywhere else. Telephone calls
    >aren't even a consideration with regards to cost these days, so we don't
    >worry about spending as much time as is required calling a customers mobile.


    I work with small/medium businesses though, who're typically not geeks
    or even IT savvy - they want a phone to "just work", so the Betamax
    stuff or chasing this weeks cheapest isn't for them, nice though it
    is...

    >All good stuff though.


    Indeed!

    Gordon
     
    Gordon Henderson, Apr 21, 2008
    #3
  4. Gordon Henderson

    Graham. Guest

    "Mike" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 21:11:45 +0000 (UTC), Gordon Henderson
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>I work with small/medium businesses though, who're typically not geeks
    >>or even IT savvy - they want a phone to "just work", so the Betamax
    >>stuff or chasing this weeks cheapest isn't for them, nice though it
    >>is...

    >
    > If ever there was a bad name to recycle then Betamax must be right
    > there at the top alongside Enron.



    I don't follow that at all Mike.
    Betamax was a superior system to VHS in several ways.
    Yes, it failed in the consumer marketplace, but not because
    of technical shortcoming, and it could be said that it evolved
    to become a success as a professional format (Betacam)

    As for the VoIP provider, I have never had a problem with
    them, and after all you only need to have 10 Euros at risk
    at any one time. Yes you would need a provider with a
    deliverable SLA in Gordon's situation, but for my modest
    domestic use they have some of the beat deals going.


    --
    Graham

    %Profound_observation%
     
    Graham., Apr 25, 2008
    #4
  5. Gordon Henderson

    Graham. Guest

    "Mike" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 21:11:45 +0000 (UTC), Gordon Henderson
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>I work with small/medium businesses though, who're typically not geeks
    >>or even IT savvy - they want a phone to "just work", so the Betamax
    >>stuff or chasing this weeks cheapest isn't for them, nice though it
    >>is...

    >
    > If ever there was a bad name to recycle then Betamax must be right
    > there at the top alongside Enron.



    I don't follow that at all Mike.
    Betamax was a superior system to VHS in several ways.
    Yes, it failed in the consumer marketplace, but not because
    of technical shortcoming, and it could be said that it evolved
    to become a success as a professional format (Betacam)

    As for the VoIP provider, I have never had a problem with
    them, and after all you only need to have 10 Euros at risk
    at any one time. Yes you would need a provider with a
    deliverable SLA in Gordon's situation, but for my modest
    domestic use they have some of the beat deals going.


    --
    Graham

    %Profound_observation%
     
    Graham., Apr 25, 2008
    #5
  6. In article <>,
    Mike <> wrote:
    >On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 21:11:45 +0000 (UTC), Gordon Henderson
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>I work with small/medium businesses though, who're typically not geeks
    >>or even IT savvy - they want a phone to "just work", so the Betamax
    >>stuff or chasing this weeks cheapest isn't for them, nice though it
    >>is...

    >
    >If ever there was a bad name to recycle then Betamax must be right
    >there at the top alongside Enron.


    I think there's a market for someone to make a shredder with the name:

    The Enron 5000

    Don't know why I think this is a good name (or where the 5000 comes
    from), but I think it's just a good name ;-)

    Gordon
     
    Gordon Henderson, Apr 25, 2008
    #6
  7. Gordon Henderson

    Iain Guest

    Mike wrote:

    If ever there was a bad name to recycle then Betamax must be right
    > there at the top alongside Enron.


    You think so? Betamax was superior to VHS and would have won the format
    wars if the porn industry hadn't chosen VHS.

    A better product at a lower price? Doesn't seem such a bad association.
     
    Iain, May 10, 2008
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. alanhs
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    4,629
    blackice
    Jul 11, 2005
  2. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,379
    Vincent C Jones
    Nov 21, 2005
  3. olabanji  timothy

    pls, help.. i need a number..pls

    olabanji timothy, Sep 9, 2003, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    853
  4. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    699
    trouble
    Aug 16, 2008
  5. palas_123
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,170
    donjohnston
    Dec 28, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page