The argument in support of Asterisk arises precisely because, of all the possible applications of Asterisk, including many that require relatively specialised skills, minimal Asterisk knowledge is required to get it going. It's sad to waste money on something that really is fairly trivial to do with Asterisk. I'm the last to say everything with open-source VoIP stuff is trivial and that you should always go that route, but in this case, it'd really be silly not to, IMHO. On 06/05/2012 01:18 PM, Adam Baird wrote:
Thanks all,
The justification for a premises based device is to allow the customer to manage their own live source however they please without having to engage us. An ATA in this case is a simple solution with a small footprint, low cost and simple administration.
For those who ask why we wouldn't just build it with Asterisk, I would say that it is primarily a matter of resource allocation. It is often simpler to perform an interop on an existing device and deploy it than it would be to build a new service, even if it is ?just Asterisk? (specially given that we are not an Asterisk shop).
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 235 E Ponce de Leon Ave Suite 106 Decatur, GA 30030 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/