[169537] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Any experience with Comcast digital voice for OOB (offlist is
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Tykwinski)
Sat Mar 1 15:21:08 2014
From: Eric Tykwinski <eric-list@truenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <7D29A187-1DC1-481D-8E52-5205290EF1D6@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 15:20:29 -0500
To: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Thanks all,
Jared, sorry I forgot about out-of-band touch tones and should of =
specified better, the client was looking to use a modem like most =
guessed.
I suggested using a cellular option since POTS wasn't available, as most =
gear usually has that as an option, and it looks like US Robotics makes =
a serial connection modem at that.
I do remember though something about a modem over VoIP protocol being =
developed, something like Jay was saying about Faxing over VoIP, but I =
guess it never took off. My guess being relying on the same line as an =
internet connection would be about that smart anyways.
Sincerely,
Eric Tykwinski
TrueNet, Inc.
P: 610-429-8300
F: 610-429-3222
On Mar 1, 2014, at 1:49 PM, Keegan Holley <no.spam@comcast.net> wrote:
> As others have said modems require POTS or at least a PBX line. Also =
isn=92t the hand-off fog VoIP ethernet? You wouldn=92t be able to stick =
that into the RJ-11 port in the modem. It would be easier to use the =
comcast internet connection with some sort of IPsec tunnel for OOB. =
It=92s cheap and mostly reliable.
>=20
> If you=92re looking for a better solution see the thread on OOB gear =
RE: opengear. They are multi-port and support, POTS, wifi and 3G for =
access.
>=20
> On Feb 28, 2014, at 2:27 PM, eric-list@truenet.com wrote:
>=20
>>=20
>> Sincerely,
>>=20
>> Eric Tykwinski
>> TrueNet, Inc.
>> P: 610-429-8300
>> F: 610-429-3222
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>=20
