Experiences with VoIP and 100+ seat sites
Aside from all of the many technical issues with installing the new VOIP PBX system, the biggest problem I have seen is moving from a traditional "Key System" to a "PBX" setup. With a PBX, you are completely changing the ways the customer's phone system is works (i.e., the customer's call flow is completely different with a PBX). While there are always work-arounds, most customers don't like radical change, and PBX systems have a hard time mimicking key system behavior. This causes a lot of grief with customers during (and after!) the transition. You can try to deploy shared lines to mimic key system behavior, but shared lines and VOIP don't always mix well (not all that reliable and some PBXs don't support them!). This is especially true when there are a lot of phone lines (more than 5!). So, you have to use Page/Park/Retrieve and/or Transfer functions instead. You will find that most customers are not happy with the change because it requires more "key presses" and is more difficult to remember all of the codes and/or softkey sequences. While some of this can be addressed with good training and a lot of hand-holding, ultimately, the customer will not be excited about the new phone system. Most customers simply want their old key system with the lower cost of VOIP. This is one of the reasons why SIP trunking is such a popular solution these days. They get their existing call flow with the cheaper call rates. Of course, the customer that is rapidly expanding and has requested new features is going to embrace the new PBX features and its many efficiencies... But, from my experience, most key system customers want to keep the call flow changes to a minimum, which is really hard to do when converting to a PBX. You really need to set expectations upfront, during the sales process, that they are getting a PBX and not a new key system. My two cents. EJ -----Original Message----- From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of voiceops-request at voiceops.org Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 9:49 AM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: VoiceOps Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2 Send VoiceOps mailing list submissions to voiceops at voiceops.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to voiceops-request at voiceops.org You can reach the person managing the list at voiceops-owner at voiceops.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of VoiceOps digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Experiences with VoIP and 100+ seat sites (Tim Bray) 2. Re: Experiences with VoIP and 100+ seat sites (Jay Hennigan) 3. Re: Experiences with VoIP and 100+ seat sites (Carlos Alvarez) 4. Rephrased Question: 100+ seat MIGRATIONS to VoIP (Darren Schreiber) 5. Re: Experiences with VoIP and 100+ seat sites (Sean Grossman) 6. Re: Experiences with VoIP and 100+ seat sites (Alex Balashov) 7. Re: Rephrased Question: 100+ seat MIGRATIONS to VoIP (Carlos Alvarez) 8. FW: Linksys PAP2T (Scott Berkman) (Jastak, Eric) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:08:52 +0000 From: Tim Bray <tim at kooky.org> To: VoiceOps at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Experiences with VoIP and 100+ seat sites Message-ID: <4F2971A4.7000409 at kooky.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 01/02/12 16:25, Darren Schreiber wrote:
Hi folks, I'd love to hear some stories (good or bad) of hosted PBX VoIP installs on 100+ seat sites (single site). Specifically if you've done this with Broadsoft or another solidified switch. I have mixed opinions on how this type of scenario can be successful and now I'm being pressed by a client on a formal opinion. I figure having it based on experience from others on a similar product is worth hearing about.
Specifically curious about how you addressed call quality issues and ensured bandwidth and uplink were sufficient.
I help look after a site with 140 ish SIP phones on the same site. Works very well. Phones all on www.voipfone.co.uk The sums for network links are easy. Bandwidth per call * calls. Then spec the right circuit. Things people forget: 0) To plan the user experience. You can just slap a new phone on a desk and expect people to use it. You need to do training for end users. Even if you show them how to make a call. Do not tell the end users it is voip. Just `A new phone system`. 1) IP header allowance in bandwidth sums. RTP, UDP, IP, then Ethernet or ATM depending on the circuit. 2) Consider Packets per second through the router/firewall. VoIP is lots of small packets. Many firewalls have a low session count limit. a 25$ router is not going to cope with all those phones. 3) Just buy enough bandwidth 4) Protect the ethernet infrastructure. You want to be using managed switches which can - drop rogue DHCP servers - drop a port if somebody pretends to be the default gateway - cope when somebody makes a loop in the network or attaches a device which floods then lan with broadcasts 5) Put the Router in a HA setup with 2 routers and 2 WAN connections. With VRRP or CARP or similar. Or agree with the customer in writing that if the WAN fails, the phones fail. - or sell divert to mobile as part of the solution. 6) Manage all the phones on a configuration server. Lock all the phones down so people can't mess with them. 7) Don't use wifi to connect phones. 8) Avoid Active SIP ALGs. You don't want anything modding SIP packets on the router. Passive devices which detect SIP to do traffic prioritization are ok. Anything which modifies packets is bad. - Sometimes the SIP aware routers get hacked. 9) Don't use low rate codecs. 711 all the way. Or 722. 10) Primary and failover DHCP and DNS servers onsite. Tim ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 09:12:05 -0800 From: Jay Hennigan <jay at west.net> To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Experiences with VoIP and 100+ seat sites Message-ID: <4F297265.5080505 at west.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 2/1/12 8:25 AM, Darren Schreiber wrote:
Hi folks, I'd love to hear some stories (good or bad) of hosted PBX VoIP installs on 100+ seat sites (single site). Specifically if you've done this with Broadsoft or another solidified switch. I have mixed opinions on how this type of scenario can be successful and now I'm being pressed by a client on a formal opinion. I figure having it based on experience from others on a similar product is worth hearing about.
We have done several with Broadsoft.
Specifically curious about how you addressed call quality issues and ensured bandwidth and uplink were sufficient.
It's pretty much the same formula as with smaller sites. As a rule, an office with lots of phones also has need for lots of data bandwidth. Some times a larger site is easier. Customers that have an office with 100+ employees understand the need for redundancy and high availability more than those with smaller offices. This allows us to provide two diverse circuits for failover and run the VoIP over one and data over the other. Only in the event of a failure of either link does QoS come into play. -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay at impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 10:33:26 -0700 From: Carlos Alvarez <carlos at televolve.com> To: Tim Bray <tim at kooky.org> Cc: VoiceOps at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Experiences with VoIP and 100+ seat sites Message-ID: <CAFn1dUGM0E6NHPw7Urh_CqaDAB2nP7x9YK6vcOsj3Cjx6K3H0w at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Tim Bray <tim at kooky.org> wrote:
9) Don't use low rate codecs. 711 all the way. Or 722.
I completely disagree. Most of our customers are on g729 and nobody was able to hear the difference when we tested that versus 711. -- Carlos Alvarez TelEvolve 602-889-3003
On 02/01/2012 01:10 PM, Jastak, Eric wrote:
Most customers simply want their old key system with the lower cost of VOIP.
Yep, that sounds about right. The political dimension of user experience transitions is definitely the most difficult part of any of this, far more difficult than any of the technical challenges, in my experience. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 260 Peachtree Street NW Suite 2200 Atlanta, GA 30303 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/
On 02/01/2012 03:19 PM, Peter Rad. wrote:
On 2/1/2012 1:13 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
Most customers simply want their old key system with the lower cost of VOIP
You sold it wrong.
I didn't sell anything. It's just what I've tended to see with my ITSP customers. And I think they sold it right; there's only so far that customer expectations can bend. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 260 Peachtree Street NW Suite 2200 Atlanta, GA 30303 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/
It really is a matter of setting expectations and guiding them into the 21st century (sometimes kicking and screaming). In fact, I've heard our sales folks tell prospects/customers that they will hate us for the first couple weeks because we're disrupting how they used to do things but once they get used to the changes they will recognize that it actually makes their business better. We do quite a few deployments in the 100-1000 seat range and in my experience: 1- As someone said, the senior management/CxO's need to feel important. 2- We have found that it is equally important (if not more so!) to make their assistant feel important. If they're not happy, then the guy that pays the bill won't be happy (sort of like the sayings, "a happy wife is a happy life" and "if momma ain't happy, ain't nobody happy") 3- As for key system emulation, Polycom does a pretty good job at keeping Shared Call Appearances in sync (we're a Broadsoft shop). Aastra, not so much. We don't do a lot of key system functionality, per se, but we do have quite a bit of professional services (lawyers) that love to have their assistant know when they are on the phone, so we do a good amount of managed lines, although we try to steer users away from it if we can. On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com>wrote:
On 02/01/2012 03:19 PM, Peter Rad. wrote:
On 2/1/2012 1:13 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
Most customers simply want their old key system with the lower cost of VOIP
You sold it wrong.
I didn't sell anything. It's just what I've tended to see with my ITSP customers. And I think they sold it right; there's only so far that customer expectations can bend.
-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 260 Peachtree Street NW Suite 2200 Atlanta, GA 30303 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/ ______________________________**_________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/**mailman/listinfo/voiceops<https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops>
The fact that so much intelligence goes into the handset and away from centralised PBX control is certainly disruptive with regard to certain things people have taken for granted, like flawless and extensive BLA/SLA. -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 260 Peachtree Street NW Suite 2200 Atlanta, GA 30303 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/
It seems that a lot of you are willing to let the customer's employees drive the attitude and acceptance of a new technology (phones, computers, anything). This is a completely wrong viewpoint and attitude. Never entertain negativity, and most importantly, never introduce it. I caught one of my guys apologizing to a customer about making things harder but saying it will get better. NO NO NO! There is nothing to apologize for, and your attitude must be one that you are 100% helping them be more effective, enjoy their jobs more, and save money/time. If a customer asks me about a key system feature that we don't support, I just positively tell them why they don't need that because we accomplish the same business function better by doing it in 'X' way. So number one rule is, drive change with no apology and with the attitude that change is always good. Most people are followers and will listen to a confident leader. For training and planning purposes you will segment your users into three groups. The owners/partners/c-level, the middle managers, and the minions. The c-suite cares about the bottom line and that their direct contacts are happy and efficient (his assistant, his direct reports). For those people you talk efficiency and overall savings (not just dollar savings on a phone bill). Most of my customers at this level have a middle or low end phone and their assistants have the phones with a button panel and more features, and they understand why I recommended that. These people care about mobility, privacy, and convenience so I stress the features that help them there, like concurrent ringing, and being able to hide their CID when making calls from their cell. The middle managers care about their budgets and their area's efficiency, and somewhat about the happiness of their minions. Talk about how to make them more effective, IE, do more in the same amount of time. These people also care about being like the chiefs so I talk to them about convenience features too. The minions want the least impact to what they do every day, and always think they have too much work whether true or not. Address them with things that will make their lives easier. "Hey, we're going to ring the CEO's cell phone at the same time as his desk phone, so you don't have to make multiple calls." Explain how things will work faster with the PBX. And always treat them like THEY own the phone system, which is mostly true since they drive the processes and call flow. Never respond to a feature request with a no. Explain how you will work around it, or tell them that you'll investigate the situation and get back to them, then explain how you will work around it. Create your own reality with absolute confidence, and 98% of people will follow. -- Carlos Alvarez TelEvolve 602-889-3003
On 2/1/2012 4:57 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
The fact that so much intelligence goes into the handset and away from centralised PBX control is certainly disruptive with regard to certain things people have taken for granted, like flawless and extensive BLA/SLA.
It's funny. There is a company at ITEXPO in Miami that is selling their system as the PBX is embedded in every handset
On 2/2/12 7:12 AM, Peter Rad. wrote:
On 2/1/2012 4:57 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
The fact that so much intelligence goes into the handset and away from centralised PBX control is certainly disruptive with regard to certain things people have taken for granted, like flawless and extensive BLA/SLA.
It's funny. There is a company at ITEXPO in Miami that is selling their system as the PBX is embedded in every handset.
What goes around comes around. The 1A2 had most of the intelligence in the handsets. Power off the box and all you lost was hold and lamps. -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay at impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
On 2/1/2012 4:22 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 02/01/2012 03:19 PM, Peter Rad. wrote:
On 2/1/2012 1:13 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
Most customers simply want their old key system with the lower cost of VOIP
You sold it wrong.
I didn't sell anything. It's just what I've tended to see with my ITSP customers. And I think they sold it right; there's only so far that customer expectations can bend.
2 ways to go about VoIP ---- here's a cheap POTS replacement <-- this is the demise of telecom btw by lowering revenues The other way is to talk about all the benefits of a hosted VoIP solution for the business and its workers and its sales and its customer service.
participants (6)
-
abalashov＠evaristesys.com -
carlos＠televolve.com -
Eric.Jastak＠adp.com -
jay＠west.net -
peeip989＠gmail.com -
peter＠4isps.com