Slashdot Mirror
Is Linux Used in Production Telephony?
jamesva asks: "The telecommunications industry is rapidly converging on Windows NT/2000 for all telephony and voice-related needs. Most ACD systems, virtual operators, and voicemail are being ported to Windows if they're not already running on it.
In the past, telephony apps have existed most
notably on OS/2, SCO, and even DOS. However,
free Unix (or unix-like) platforms have absolutely no penetration in this area, with seemingly no chance on the horizon.
The Bayonne app server from the GNU folks seems to be the one exception, but even then there doesn't
seem to much built around it or anyone using it. It reached a 1.0 release in September and was met with no fanfare. Even the
LinuxTelephony doesn't seem to have much news. Can someone prove me wrong? Why is this the case? I'm interested in finding out if anyone is using Linux (or any free OS) in a production environment for something like voicemail or ACD. These types of systems require high availability and reliability and Linux just seems like a natural fit."
I tried to install Linux and Slashcode on my homebrew hacked PBX telephony system, but then all my calls were being routed to goatse...
I assure you the telephony industry is -NOT- rushing to use windows, we're not using DOS, or OS/2 and yes.. we might just be using some flavor of unix...
So can just any Monkey post a question to slashdot?
Either this is complete & total ignorance on my part, or, well, it's just complete & total ignorance. I thought that Large scale Unix based systems basically ran the switches, backbones/large servers behind Telephone/Telecommunication Networks. That's how the uber geeks found out about it, trashing for manuals to all of these VAX/VMS/UNIX systems, dialing in to them, and hax0ring their way in to screwing with their friends/enemies who may have flamed them on a local BBS. Am I wrong?
Avaya does this now, and they are porting more and more of there application VoIP services to LINUX, as well as Win2K like you said.
but a lot of solaris/sparc machines doing our telephony. The uptime is just too good on a *nix vs 2K.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
www.linuxtelephony.org
www.christopherlewis.com
Last year I tried to find linux software to use with my voice capable hardware modem. I looked *hard*. All I could come up with were a few pre-alpha apps that needed to be compiled that worked either very badly or not at all.
Linux being the DIY operating system that it is, people tend to write drivers for the hardware that they have. How many linux hackers have dialogic boards in their machines? At >$500, I doubt the number is very high. No drivers, no applications.
The first question I'd ask is: Are the applications there? If not, there it is.
You mentioned one application that uses Linux. There are probably many more that work under Windows, because that's probably what companies are developing for. More to the point, that's probably what companies are asking for -- "Give us something that looks like what we're used to for web surfing already!"
Now granted, within the past few years Linux's desktop has grown leaps and bounds beyond where it was -- but then, it wasn't there when these companies first started developing their apps, and wasn't an option then.
That, ultimately, is the issue.
This is Mark Spencer's most recent project. Same guy that did Cheops and started GAIM. Really cool stuff.
Within the last 6 months I went through a phone system evaluation process. I was focused on IP telephony to a certain degree, so it was limited.
I agree that most items are being ported to Windows (scares the heck out of me, it's one thing for your web server to be down 6 hours, try having your phone system down for 6 hours).
The primary area where new development was being done, that wasn't Windows, I found to be in VxWorks. This makes sense to me since a RTOS really is a better platform, and at the same time, bypasses all of the Windows worms, etc.
Ok, I give up, why you?
OK its text to voice, but AFAIK they are selling hard to the telecoms industry with rVoice
Their development platform is primarily Linux. I only know because a friend works there, I am not associated with them in any way.
I don't read your sig, why do you read mine?
Digium. A GNU/Linux telphony company based in Huntsville, AL. They sell T1 PCI cards for GNU/Linux machines and distribute a free as in GPLed software PBX. Check them out!
Disclosure: No, I don't work for them, but I have had lunch with them and they're pretty nice guys!
A company called West Telemarketing is working toward moving over their VRUs (Voice Recognition Units) from SCO to Linux by integrating the Dialogic (Intel) drivers into the kernel.
From what I have heard, things are in Beta but very stable and soon to be moving forward to production systems.
-- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
What runs on my 5Ess then? Or Voicemail system? UNIX has had fantastic penetration in the telecom industry, what with being written in large part by a telco, for telco use. (SYSV)
Linux penetration is a totally different story. Unless I see less than 5 minutes a year of downtime, and more than 20 years of hardware and software support for a platform, I can't see using it any time soon.
-Besh!
Here at work we use a 3Com NBX 100 system .
I've FTP'd into it and it seems to be running some sort of a BSD variant.
I guess it could also run linux.. but I don't quite feel like pokeing around in our production telephone system.
This seems promising. Zapata Telephony, dedicated to bringing the world a much-needed reasonable and affordable Computer Telephony platform, and hence a revolution in the arena of Computer Telephony.
Support Texas Troops use TXGoogle
The company I work for is about to implement a full setup using Asterisk for all phone traffic in the company. A 4 span T1 card on a twin P3 1.0Ghz system with 1.0GB of RAM a 110GB raid 5 array (using ext3fs) is the system that will be driving everything. Needless to say, since this will be driving all telephone traffic it must NEVER be compromised. Ergo, this system is running Slackware 8 with minimally installed packages (only those essential to make the system run and allow compilation of software). Not even inetd is running on this server. The software has been compiled with GCC 3.2 that has had the IBM stack protector patch applied to it. Everything looks good, but the system will not be pressed into service until next week when the 2 T1s are activated.
The reason for having Linux on a machine is to be able to access it via the net and/or play with it. Both of these are VERY BAD ideas when considering a telephony application. Telephone systems shouldn't ever allow remote administration, IMHO.
So, with no net, no place to play, what reasons are left to want to use Linux?
--Mike--
Since we're talking telephony, are we talking embedded operating systems? Perhaps Windows CE, or more than likely Windows NT Embedded?
Could some of this reticence to Linux also be related to the available development frameworks for low-level coders?
Or is this just a case where managers are playing it safe?
--- have you healed your church website?
Or is this a very similar question (or at least a very similar answer) to this very recent Ask Slashdot?
sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)
I just installed asterisk PBX software at home this weekend; not exactly a 'production' environment, but I was impressed. Bayonne looks promising too.
In other words, I think the fact that vendors support creation of telephony systems using Linux at all is an indicator that it is in fact being used. I would not use the relative success/failure of a handful of telephony related projects as a guage for the success/failure of Linux in telephony.
But for what it's worth, I am aware of a $7-digit custom speech system that's running reliably on RedHat 4.2
runs on NT 3.51 and is maintained by a lousy jerk. I can tell you it was not pretty when the thing borked on us... downtime was *only* 6 hours but it took another 5 days until our calls were properly routed again.
Qwest(USWest) has been using a Linux cluster for voice recognition on 411 calls for about 3.5 years now. the uptime is great.
Use the right tool for the right job. If windows works the best then please don't let your bias affect how the company runs.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Details on
http://www.cirpack.fr/products/hvs.shtml
3Com's foray into telephone systems runs a BSD variant (NetBSD, IIRC)... (This is the stuff that's supposed to compete with the Meridian telephone systems)
We have an NBX100 system; the main chassis is modular, and connects to the telephones over standard ethernet ports (so there's no need to have separate phone wiring - the same jack used for your computer can be used for your phone; if you're short on network ports, the phone even has an RJ-45 passthrough, so you can plug your computer into your phone, and the phone into the walljack, which goes back to your switch.)
By default, the phones run their own protocol (not IP - possibly IPX, but I've never put a sniffer on the line to find out), but there is a mode to have them use h.323, so you can have remote extensions running over the internet.
I used to work for Lucent/AG Communication Systems. The project I was on, their ClientCare call center system (think big... an entire in and outbound call center solution for arbitrarily large companies), ran on Solaris and FreeBSD. We had Solaris for the big Oracle Parallel server DB and FreeBSD tied the little bits and pieces together such as the CSR clients [which ran on Windows], the ISDN line management, and the playback of our utterly annoying hold music. It worked rather well, in the end. I think they're still doing it that way.
Here's a link to the product itself: http://www.agcs.com/productsv2/CallCenter/works.ht m
#44
If you include voice of IP implementations on *nix, you have several choices. For instance, Clarent does most of their implementation on Sun machines. This won't help you if you're looking for free stuff, but that is an entirely different question.
Mythological Beast
Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
We're running a system here based on a redhat 6.x distro.
eOn
It's a great system with tons of expansion. Ours is the older DSP model which tends to resemble a CO switch. We can provide just about the same services to our company as a smaller CO. It has two celeron (I think 366's) in a hot failover configuration. Our Windows based CRM app uses a CTI connection for autodialing. Pretty basic stuff.
We only run unix os's with a few NT machines (mostly admin consoles) in our datacenter. The problem with putting a Linux box in production, we have platinum support from Sun. Every server is a sun box, and its standardized for backup, database and clustering. If we put a Linux box, it has to run it on sparc hardware, and we have to have special procedures just for this one box.
Its much easier to run GPL'ed software ported to Solaris, than to switch the OS. We in fact run many GPL'ed software packages, the cost saving is amazing. The backend software is highly specialized, and will not be ported to linux.
To make sure the software is locked in production, the developers put license strings for everything, and then they lock it down to IP/Domain/Hardware/os version/etc..
Sometimes you want the software to be written in house, but with the features, support, updates to software, its easier to write a check and get everything at once. If you want to know who the main players are, Nokia, Nortel, Software.com and Ericsson are the largest players.
For us it was a balance of Windows and Unix.
I used to work for a Fortune 100 software and hardware distributor that also has one of the highest revenue-generating sites on the Internet. We ran a all of our call routing and control services on Unix (can't remember if it was Solaris or HP-UX for those servers). BUT we then transferred all the post-event descriptive information to an MS SQL Server to do data mining against the data. Some people might have thought that MS software ran the whole show, since most managers would use the SQL app to see how their sales teams were doing, but the whole thing was in fact fed by Unix.
http://www.vovida.org
They probably *could* do the same thing under Linux, but I'd rather that they not do it. (The situation with Oracle on Linux is already too close IMHO).
I worked for 4.5 years in the telecommunications industry using Unix (SCO) servers and I can tell you why people are using Windows. I always heard from IT managers "I don't want a Unix box on my network! I don't know how to admin Unix and I do not want learn how, so if you don't have a Windows solution, we don't want your business." These IT managers were just not interested in a machine that would not crash etc... they are used to the reboot and GUI tools. It was pathetic! Plus they bought into the idea if it is all from one company it has to work seamlessly together, yeah right.
A company offering telephony related services has enough to sort out without having to use a non-established(for telephony) platform. If other operating systems have already proved suitable and reliable in this field, then why should they increase their workload by working out how to do it on Linux?
VOCAL
Now I hope and pray that I will But today I am still, just a bill
The real bear in getting this to work was finding a modem suitable for use with vgetty; vgetty's docs list some voice modems known to work, but most of these are 5+ years old and $300 and up, if you can even find them for sale.
Clued in by a Usenet post, I found a modern modem that works: the 3Com 2976 Voice/Fax/Data modem. It sells in online stores for around $50. (Note that not all modems which purport to have voice functionality are supported, and controllerless "winmodems" are not likely to work.)
I also tried using Asterisk, but it wasn't really suitable for my voicemail needs. As I recall it did not handle disconnect detection very well, potentially leaving the phone off the hook for a long time. There was also a pronounced lack of any HOWTOs or detailed documentation available either with the program, with the PBX card I purchased from them to run the program, or on the Internet in general.
My sense is that Asterisk's creator actively discourages freely available documentation, in order to have people avail themselves of paid support. To his credit you do get one month of free support for the software and the card when you purchase the latter, and he was helpful in IRC when I spoke with him.
Plum Voice Portals uses Linux for their VoiceXML IVR platform. As far as I know they are one of the few companies that use linux for VoiceXML telephony systems.
Let's see... Linux RedHat 7.1 and 7.3 for the Operating system, Oracle 8i Database, Oracle 9i Application Server, Oracle's integrated Apache, X.25/HDLC hardware/drivers. Collecting 100's of thousands of AMA/OCC/CDR/EMI call records a day from telco switches... DMS, 5E, EWSD, DCO, Softswitches. Loading the call records into Oracle, running statistical reports against the call records. Collecting OMPR traffic reports. Mediating call records, sending them to billing. Nope... I guess that Linux isn't involved in telephony at all...
http://www.nams.net/
doug@nams.net
65.0% slashdot pure
Nope. Next question.
I know for a fact that the AUDIX system from Avaya/Lucent/Bell Labs runs on SVR4 Unix. I watch it boot up every time we loose power. :)
I also know that Avaya is moving a lot (maybe even all) of their voicemail stuff over to Linux and W2k.
...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
http://www.digium.com/
In 2002, Linux Support Services, Inc. changed their name to Digium, as the focus of the business had grown to include not just Enterprise Linux Support but Linux-based Telephony development. Digium has developed the Open Source Asterisk PBX Software Suite. Finding a lack of high-quality, reasonably priced telephony hardware for Linux, Digium has moved to develop powerful hardware solutions for Linux based telephony. Digium offers a range of professional services to complement our hardware and software offerings. Custom software development services are available. We can enhance and extend our software offereings to provide custo mized solutions for telephony customers, and consulting services are available to help plan and implement enterprise telephony systems and Linux based data networks. Digium, based in Huntsville, AL, is located in Cummings Research Park, 3 minutes from Interstate 565 and 10 from Huntsville International Airport. If you are interested in visiting, please contact us for driving directions and staff availability.
There has been a lot of Linux buzz over at Ericsson for quite some time now. They are betting the shop that the underlying JAMBALA architecture will run on Linux Clusters. The lab that is working on this initiative is located in Montreal, Canada.
Remembering your name in the morning is already a good start...
Rumor has it that Cisco is planning to port it's AVVID (Architecture for Voice Video and Integrated Data) IP telephony server to Linux in the near future. Hopefuly that is still the case, The management front end used to run on Apache on NT 4.0. Since it's evolution into 2000 server with CM 3.0 release it moved to IIS (with all the risks and problems that come with it, I might add.) All you out there should bug your Cisco reps about a Linux port and creat the demand. FYI, Cisco's SIP Proxy does run on RedHat Linux 7.0 or later or Solaris and is very nice, I have used it and am happy with it, but as we all know SIP lacks features right now (Like VM.)
With Microsoft's new product life cycle plan here ,
windows NT and 2000 are now approaching their decayed support eras.
This would mean no new licenses for Windows 2000 only three years after the release. So "new" products are going to have to use something else. I don't know how dependant on the OS the applications are but the savings and customizability should make it worth it.
Microsoft would push them toward XP embedded.
No, your corporate firewall was made by a moron.
I can't speak to what software runs on phone switches, but I can speak as a user at the "medium sized company" level, and as a user I can say that the industry seems to work primarily with embedded boxes for telecom. When you want a switch you buy a switch, and it does what it does. Whether that switch runs linux or SunOS or VxWorks or some proprietary OS is pretty much irrelevant to you if it functions for you in its capacity as a switch. If linux is being used as the basis for phone switching equipment, people probably wouldn't know, unless they had some contact at the company who developed the switch. This is a traditionally very embedded market, where name recognition of an OS like "Windows" or "linux" or whatever is irrelevant to the function of the device. Telecom can be thought of as the ultimate high availability application. In all my dealings with telephone switches, nothing ever crashed or needed to be rebooted. EVER. Even when installing new hardware. This kind of high availability doesn't readily lend itself to traditionally end-user oriented operating systems. I suspect the reason linux isnt perceived as penetrating the telecom sector is because its not, and if it were, it wouldn't matter because people who set up and managed the switches, by and large, dont give a shit how it works, just that it works, that it works all the time and never stops working. :) If your job is to turn a nut, does it really matter if you use a wrench, pliers or your fingers as long as the nut gets turned?
This too shall pass.
it's perl and mgetty and vgetty
There does seem to be efforts afoot to use Linux in the telecom arena, maybe slanted towards embedded Linux, but evidence here.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
"The telecommunications industry is rapidly converging on Windows NT/2000 for all telephony and voice-related needs."
Perhaps for customer offices, but not for their own switches. I worked for a cell phone company a couple years ago and part of my job involved getting data off their central switches. All of the Lucent and Nortel switches were running UNIX - their own, but UNIX nevertheless.
No electrons were harmed creating this post, though some may have been subjected to electrical and/or magnetic fields.
Quicknet has a low - cost 1 port card that will do the trick with Linux and Windows drivers:
http://www.quicknet.com
Also check out Pika for 4 port cards with traditional analogue and VoIP capabilities with Windows and Linux drivers:
http://www.pikatech.com
Aslo check out the Bayonne project. Linux based Open Source telephony system with interfaces to Quicknet, Pika, and other cards:
http://bayonne.sourceforge.net/
Dialogic (intel) is a voice specific hardware card that can perform many telephony tasks, although they aren't cheap consumer type cards. They have drivers for linux though, although they aren't nearly as mature as the win32 drivers from what I understand.
Well, according to my SmartFilter, not only do they sell PBX stuff, but also oodles of sex..
If you are talking about OSS (Operational Support Software), then you are talking big-boy UNIX (AIX, HP, SUN). You are also talking big honking hardware (32-way boxes, 16 gig ram, terrabyte disk arrays, etc). Nothing suitable for linux or windows.
However, if you are talking GUI junk (CSR front end, billing system GUI, middleware junk) then you are probably talking windows. You won't see these ported to LINUX any time soon.
For the record, I work as an integrator for telecom software.
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
I know of several call-center (telemarketing) solutions that run on Linux. There are Dialogic drivers (and isn't $500 a bit conservative for a dialogic board?)
In any case, if you're looking for some sort of call center solution with built in data and scripting solutions, one of the largest developers of such a product uses Linux - Noble Systems http://www.noblesys.com
I certainly wouldn't say that they've got the best solution or the most intuitive interface, but they have the best call prediction engine that I've seen. They actually just (18 mo. ago?) re-outfitted the 2nd largest telemarketing company in the world with their solution.
Warning: even though their server software is Linux based, their client software is either terminal or Win32 based (through FourJ's)
Why is the parent moderated "informative" when all it is is a link taken straight from the story! I don't know who's stupider or lazier, Christopher_G_Lewis for posting something redundant, or the moderators for not reading the story properly themselves.
I manage two Asterisk servers used in production environments. It's rock solid and the hardware is inexpensive and reliable. Best of all the code is freely available so you can hack on it to your heart's content. In fact I'm working on integrating it into the billing/provisioning system of my ISP so we can get customer info pulled up on the help desk person's screen as the phone is ringing.
Check out http://www.linuxsupport.net/ for information on Asterisk and telephony hardware. I believe they sell some starter kits ranging from about $100 (with a USB FXS adapter and an FXO card) up to $1000 (includes a T1 card and channel bank.)
My employer provides call center software, and while our client-side apps run on Windows, we've been moving many of our server-side telephony applications from SCO to Linux.
This includes our speech-enabled automated directory and paging applications.
leaders in this area until a few years ago (I haven't been keeping track, so they still may be).
But all the 3rd party vendors recognized that UnixWare was a sinking ship, and started asking the hardware vendors (DLGC, NMS) for Linux support. Why? Because it's cheap and it at least looks like the redheaded stepchild UnixWare never had. So with a little work, the 3rd party vendors have their app running on Linux.
Add into this the fact that Microsoft also recognized UnixWare was a sinking ship, and started marketing. Remember, it's all about developers developers developers. So many 3rd parties were confused and switched their app to Windows (partial rewrites) instead of switching to linux (minimal porting effort).
I think that for some people who ended up on Windows, there may be some displeasure with the reliability / quality. But I think they are probably outnumbered by the people who are having positive results with W2K/NT in these setups. The net effect is that Windows is gaining in this market.
Why are people still using the outdated PBX system? Why should
you be limited to 64 channels on a T1 line? What about VOIP???
Case
in point... Cisco 7900 Series IP phones..
Cisco IP Phones are designed to enhance productivity and address the
specific needs of the variety of users in your organization. The Cisco IP
Phones 7960G and 7940G feature a large, pixel-based LCD display and can support
additional information services including Extensible Markup Language (XML)
capabilities. XML-based services can be customized to provide users with
access to a diverse array of information such as stock quotes, employee extension
numbers, or any Web-based content. The possibilities are endless
Last time I checked, XML was everywhere which means you could build a
phone system to suit your needs
In the SIP community, Linux is used quite extensively. I just returned from an even called SIPIt which is the major interoperability event for SIP based telephony. There were around 50 vendors there -- everyone from big players like Cisco and Polycom to little startups. Many, many people there were using Linux for their products -- I would say at least 50%.
I also have worked with several SIP companies recently, Vovida, and open source SIP stack and suite of applications later aquired by Cisco, and Jasomi, a company that produces telephony boundary control products. These places used Linux extensively as the deployment platform, and there are real working deployments out there using these products.
So for SIP anyway, the answer is a resounding yes!
I've always hated the word "telephony". Mostly because it has "phony" on the end, although that seems appropriate when you consider what absolute crap most telephony software is. :)
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
The PBX, ACD, and similar applications are not large scale. Such systems are often located at the customer's facility and sizes of 50 to 300 users are a huge chunk of this market. I've been out of this industry for almost ten years but the actual switches and routers tended to be embedded applications and then some form of PC would be used for monitoring, configuration, generating reports, etc. If the PC crashed a supervisor didn't get a report, and had to reboot and issue the print command again. Not a big deal. The embedded software kept running during all of this happily switching and routing calls.
Telephony apps are big bucks. Combine that with who usually buys them for a company (non technical managers, or committees) along with 50 rounds of RFPs... you'll end up on a platform already used by the customer, every time. After all, the client is already using Win32. As the switch side is tied tighter and tighter to the computing side, Win32 becomes even more attractive since it's on every desktop, and on the back-end as well. No sales pitch is needed in that respect... the myth of "seamless integration" is offered as a benefit, and what sounds more seamless to a customer using already Win32...
You combine this with the reality that small switch products are typically gutted versions of the real ones. Feature sets of Real Ones are dictated by Real Companies with Real Money. They buy things like Nortel(Wiltel/Nextera/whatever it's called this week), Compaq (or whatever they're called this week), HP (again). They don't buy switch products like ROLM, Panasonic, or Fujitsu... and they don't put E-Machines or $200 Walmart boxes on their user's desktops. All are great at what they do, but try to put any in a real telecom center and you'll be laughed at.
Make a (freeOS) version, none of the large places will buy it. That means your large-scale version will need to be either embedded or Win32; and as a vendor, once it's built you won't double your development costs by making a totally separate (FreeOS) smaller version when you can simply cut-n-paste from from a system that's already done(since the development is already paid for). From the large solution, a smaller one is made for the rest of you... and it's pure gravy, because designing it didn't cost a dime. And quite frankly, low-end users like it... it's Win32, they use Win32... they can have their little Screen Pops and "seamless integration". Yeah, they can have it with a FreeOS just as easy, but... apples and oranges aren't seamless to the layperson. They've already got Win32, they already know it. You tell me which one you'll buy, and remember your name is "Sally, the GM", and you don't care to learn about Telephony. Or computers for that matter... you just want this idiot sales pig to give you a switch and leave, so that you can get back to work.
There are a few FreeOS tel things around, but by and large, they're anecdotle when compared to even an Option11. The ROI for developing a large scale FreeOS solution just isn't out there yet, which means you won't be seeing any gutted "small" versions either... only small (anecdotle) solutions that hope to some day be scaled up into something useful. It may change (hopefully,) but not yet.
help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am
Have you looked at HP's telephony apps on LInux/Unix?
They are third to fourth in sales in the industry..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
www.somanetworks.com
Building a production VOIP/ISDN/POTS system on Linux. There are definitely some challenges but between asterisk and bayonne and the hardware support on Linux, I think there is definitely the possibility. Bear in mind that when I started, I did not know anything about telephony, but I am picking it up rapidly.
Anyway, I just thought I'd throw in my $.02 (USD).
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Having worked with the Cisco AVVID IP telephony system, I can say that in it's current form, it runs *quite* well on Windows. I've got a phone sitting on my desk right now, and we've deployed it throughout our company. Since deployment, it has been completely trouble free. There are many extremely cool features that it picks up, through it's integration with Microsoft Exchange and other Microsoft services. The expansion and customization ability for the system is tremendous.
That said, I believe that the biggest problem in getting a telephony system under Linux will be pulling it all together in one package. With Windows, Cisco has the advantage (or disadvantage, depending on who you are) of working with a single company. Aside from the management interface, everything is based on Microsoft technology. They're using MSDE for their data engine, along with Microsoft Exchange, and Microsoft Windows 2000 for the server.
It all really depends on how much work Cisco wants to put into it. With Microsoft they have pull to help get things done, because of the opportunity it represents for Microsoft. They've got a vested interest in keeping the system running, and keeping good relations. Because Cisco would (potentially) have to use different technologies from different companies, they may have more trouble getting everything pulled together. The software Cisco needs exists, but free software developers may not have as much drive to support such an endeavor, since Cisco is essentially the only group who would profit from it.
I think Cisco would be more apt to port it, if someone could easily demonstrate that the interoperability and features exist to support the platform.
This isn't designed to be a flame, or a troll and this isn't an attempt to start a my OS is better than your OS flame war. It's just a fact of life that I've observed.
As a manager responsible for exactly these types of things for a very large corporate, I wouldn't use Linux in these applications, or in any business related way in my company. I cannot.
'WHY EVER NOT?' I hear you ask (and yes, I can hear that indignant tone, and the anger rising in your voice from here).
My Answer to why not (You're not gonna like this): "Because it's Linux".
My business-based perception of Linux is that it's a random assembly of a large assortment of independant programs. They probably all work together, but no-one ever checked that to a level that I, in my position, can rely on to the extent that I would be prepared to put my butt on the line with.
Linux is a *kernel*. That's it. I can, to some extent, rely on that - but even that has it's issues.
There are too many operating systems that call themselves 'Linux'. So tell me, which one is the One True Linux(tm)? And while you're there, answer me this: Do you answer rhetorical questions?
I don't hate Linux. I *love* the open source movement, and I love free software almost as much. There's an incredible array of absolutely brilliant work out there. I use Linux lots, every day. I run Mandrake and Red Hat at home. The fact that, despite that I've been a professional unix administrator for over ten years, but the fact that I still have problems with the most basic 'these should have been fixed before release' problems on a daily basis with both my samples of 'Linux' tells me that I absolutely cannot put my nuts on the line with these OS's in a business critical production application
Telephony is exactly that: A business critical production application. Even more so for a company that makes it's money from telemarketing or customer service. I absolutely *cannot* send the entire staff out for coffee mid-afternoon because the flurgenhurger didn't work with the dooverlacky and it took the production box down.
Because Linux is so loose, so uncontrolled, and so 'random', I cannot - in my capacity as a senior manager responsible for the uptime of business critical systems - risk using 'Linux' in any of it's incarnations in this environment.
What I must do is stick with the tried, true, and proven. Those that are whole operating systems, not just kernels, that are centrally managed and controlled by one body.
What are those? Which are the OS that I /would/ use in my production
environment? Solaris, FreeBSD, and HP-UX of course, in that order. What else?
Now, one more thing: If you've read this, and you're angry, and you feel that you need to flame me for this: You didn't understand what I just said.Regardless of that, I'm expecting a raft of "you're stupid" and "you like goatse.cx" and "your mother smells of elderberries" and other well considered counter-arguments. Save it thanks.
I find your ideas intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Back when I did telephony programming, it was all on OS/2, largely because OS/2 was a realtime OS, while Windows is not. *nix also generally has realtime kernel support available as well, and the high-end switching software that isn't proprietary generally runs on *nix.
At the time, however, hardware providers were working on Windows APIs, probably because of the prevalence of Windows in the workplace. There was a big push years ago towards PC-managed telephony over old proprietary PBX systems. It gave businesses the ability to have their IT staff do a lot of customization without very much training.
The important thing to note is that the migration to Windows was on the corporate end, not on the provider end. There's no way any seriously critical switching software is going to be running on Windows.
We boot our home machine to Windows only so that we can use Voice and Video Chat on Yahoo Messenger.
Otherwise, I have my wife using only Linux on our home machine.
Unix is a Bell Labs creation.... the new Avaya Definity PBX platform, runs Linux. Look for the S8300 and the S8700 products on their website. The S8700 runs dual rack mount Linux Servers. Quite a big move for them.
Well, according to my SmartFilter, not only do they sell PBX stuff, but also oodles of sex.
Interesting.
Now I have no idea that SmartFilter, Microsoft, or anybody else is doing this. But...
Wouldn't it be a powerful marketing strategy to get your competitors listed as sex (or otherwise icky-poo) sites on as many censorware lists as possible?
It wouldn't be anywhere NEAR as obvious as getting them onto black hole lists. Email disruptions would be noticed right away. Censorware deletions are much more subtle - and less suspect.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The company I work for provides ehanced telecom services (sorry, no names, just in case they don't want this information public) that has hundreds of call centers across the US and thousands of full time operators.
We use commodity linux systems on dell hardware to drive dialogic record/playback/synth on carrier T1's and our switches. We also use linux based systems for some limited text to speach operations as well.
I would put a rough estimate on the number of these systems at around 200 with 4-16 T1's per machine.
Just to make it a little easier, Asterisk is the software solution to go with Digium. It's GNU.
... I work for a company that resels their cards, so take that last with the preferred grain of salt.
From my limited exposure, the Digium folks are very helpful to potential clients.
Uh
I submitted this as a story when Avaya first cut over to Linux. Currently only their small business server runs W2k. I promise that thing was/is an abortion (pardon my crudeness). As another poster said, Linux is the horse Avaya is betting on, and the new servers supposedly are selling like hotcakes.
:-(
Basically Avaya ported their software to Linux and it just runs as another application. My question though, is how come I can't download the source to the GPL'ed parts of the server (none of Avaya's SW is GPL'ed)?
When I think of those poor lost souls using Cisco's AVVID
If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
I'm not up on my telephony definition but VoiceGenie runs on Linux
UNIX/Linux Consulting
I'd convert my office to something like Asterisk as my PBX doing all VoIP in a heartbeat if only there was a source for inexpensive, quality, compatible VoIP handsets. The Cisco and Snom sets would be great, but they're still too costly. Until then, I'll have to stick with the less expensive proprietary PBX we use now. The forklift upgrade costs even with the software side being free (open source) are just too steep for small offices like this.
In my case, the most popular voice mail hardware (Dialogic) never had Linux support; they used SCO and then NT (due to Microsoft investing in them).
When they came out with Linux support, it was only for the newer hardware that we never used.
Some Nortel products have processoring units that run a flavor on Linux on them. I'm not sure if they've made their way into any shipping products yet.
"People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
Telecomm systems PBXs historically/typically run on home-brew OSs. This is changing.
With shorter time to market and tighter margins, the techies nowadays, are rarely given the option to roll their own OS, they have to buy one.
Symbian, Lynx et al, have carved out their niches but there is a new OS on the telecomm block.
The portability, the availability of know-how, development tools and can't forget to mention the price, puts Linux at the top of the list when the time comes to shop around for an OS embedded or otherwise.
What VoIP today is lacking are the services and features that most telephony users are used to. What will happen is a migration from traditional telephony to VoIP with a grey fuzzy area inbetween. Look for new hybrids of both traditional telephony and VoIP. The new upstarts in VoIP will have to look out when the traditional telephony manufacturers hit the market with their versions of what a comm server should be.
The traditional telephony manufacturers are well aware of Linux by now, so considering development times we should be swamped in Linux powered VoIP telecomm systems anytime real soon now.
http://old.lwn.net/2002/0307/pr/pr5588.php3
Over a million minutes a month running on Linux boxes...yeah...i work there...
We have developed our own IVR system using SIP and RTP (in Java) and it runs pretty well on both Linux and Windows. We're planning on getting an Asterisk system together with the boards from Digium to bridge from the "PSTN world" to the "VoIP world". It looked like a great solution for that, we want something that's reasonably cheap and that can just allow customers on PSTN lines to connect to our IVR systems.
Dialogic (now Intel) used to support SCO. Now it's Linux and Windows. Our app (fully automated telephony system handling IVR, call transfers, bridging, etc. features and a volume of over 10,000,000 minutes annually) runs on Dialogic/SCO but we're porting it to Linux. It's been reasonably painless - we're just testing extensively due to the platform change, Dialogic driver change from 2 to 5.1, etc. Downtime is not an option so our CEO will not allow the app to run on Windows (tee hee, how often do you see an enlightened CEO like that??).
There are some Linux CATI (not strictly telephony but call-center support) projects over at FreshMeat. Ericsson is using Linux in their "Carrier Class" systems. I've spent time with Vovida and Bayonne at LinuxWorld Expo and some Telephony conferences and they seem to be reasonably vibrant projects.
So yes, Linux is used in telephony.
~~~~~~~
"You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
"Is Linux used in production telephony"?
What the HECK do you mean by that?
Are you talking about:
1) The core of a telephone carrier's network?
2) The core of the network of an ISP that is providing some telephony-related application (like POTS-emulation-over-cable, VoIP, or VoIP-related QoS enhancements)?
3) Commercial standalone PBXes?
4) PBX replacements (as a plugin card/driver/app for a PC)?
5) Modem-based answering machine/fax applications?
6) Desktop VoIP applications?
7) Server-room network VoIP servers?
8) Server-room VoIP/POTS bridges?
9) Voice menu hell servers - standalone or part of one of the above?
or a host of other "Production Telephony" applications?
When I saw the question the first thing I thought was 1). But the text seems more directed to 3) and 9), while responders are all over the map.
EACH of these seems to deserve its own item!
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Alcatel's OmniPCX 4400 PBX runs a BSD derivative.
Their voicemail system uses Linux.
They are porting more of the PBX to Linux
We use a VOIP solution from Shoreline Communications. From our perspective, it's boxes that just work, but the docs says they're running VxWorks, not Windows. They do integrate with Windows via a Java call manager app.
I don't know how good they are but check out Noble Systems.
My company (sorry can't say at this point) is currently developing its next generation voice product with a RH Linux backend.
"...the shortest distance between two points may be straight line, but it is by no means the most interesting."
http://www.asterisk.org/
NMS Communciations provides Linux drivers and support for their boards (as well as Solaris and Windows).
Linux will have an uphill battle competing with Solaris and WinNT/2K in the emerging VoIP market. If you look at the product lines of the companies developing SoftSwitch and SoftPBX technologies you can divide them roughly into Service Provider (Big Telco) and Enterprise (Business Customer) markets.
:) WinNT and Win2K are the platforms that are being used for development. This applies to the soft PBX market, the software ACD market, and the unified messaging market. The model for maintaining uptime here is hacked and slashed version of Windows (think Citrix), and throwing lots of redundant servers at the problem.
Products aimed at the Big Telcos, requiring carrier class service (99.999% Uptime) are using Solaris on Sun or OEM Sparc hardware or they are using proprietary Unix versions as is traditional in this market. The SoftSwitch or Call Manager is the next gen product here. It talks SS7 or ISDN to the phone network, and uses MGCP, SGCP, or some other proprietary protocol to control some type of hardware gateway that has all the T1/E1s connected to it. The softswitch can also instruct the gateway to hand off calls to a VoIP network, and can signal in the VoIP network using H.323, SIP, or a proprietary protocol.
For the enterprise, where uptime is not as critical (tell that to someone who can't make a phone call
The only place where Linux is making in-roads is in the SIP world. There are companies out there making and selling SIP Proxy servers that run on Linux, and yes they are being deployed in the real world. SIP won't save us through. MSN Messenger is bundled with every copy of XP, and they're giving it away free to everyone else. So you aren't going to get rich writing a SIP softphone that runs on Windows.
If you're really curious about the future of VoIP and voice in general, read up on SIP. Your cellphone will be running it before you know it.
That's the view from behind the curtains here in the VoIP world.
...and it is utter crap, a complete pile of stinking shit. I was the original engineer on the implementation project, and I switched jobs just to get away from it.
Top it all off with draconian licensing and grotesque consulting fees, and you have every IT managers worst nightmare.
I cannot say this more forcefully: Avaya software sucks.
Well, these guys seem to think Linux in telecom is a good idea...
The company I used to work for is converting their class 5 switch's ACD box from a vt console to a x86 Solaris box.
I have not kept you with everything, but I would like to make a suggestion. I like most other people have to reboot into Windozes to use some voice program and it would be nice not to. So with that in mind why doesn't someone have a suggestion box for Linux users to ask for things like this, and take the biggest number and work on them first,, like voice apps. for an example. I have never heard of such a thing no where I have tryed to look. Forgive my spelling I am just a simple person with less than grade 8 education. Thank you for putting this up..
I lead up the sustaining engineering for VoIP at a major long distance carrier, and we run almost a billion minutes a month of VoIP. We are the largest VoIP carrier in the world, and are pushing the telephony envelope in every direction. Sorry, nowhere in the VoIP cloud is a singular non-unix box. UNIX was born to be a class V phone switch, and now as the backbone for SS7 gatekeeping, Billing Collection, Network Management, Policy Serving (route resolution), and the core OS of Trunking Media Gateways, it has been reborn tenfold. Windows NT cannot penetrate this market. Besides I shudder at the thought of managing several hundred NT servers (not that they could replace my cloud of Sun 4500s, 6500s, Netra 1400s, and many Netra T1's). In fact I would humbly guess that we have the largest singular UNIX platform in the world - this entire system functioning as a IXC LD Carrier. Heck, let's dig a little further (out of VoIP and into our legacy equipment) - STP - Unix based backbone of ss7 network worldwide SCP - Unix database for Local Number Portability & toll free, credit card calling, etc. Centest - Runs between the DCS (whoops another unix based, digital cross connect system) and the media gateways as well as the Alcatel TDM (DEX also Unix based)... Shucks , this list could go on forever, and it is all unix. We even use Unix from the desktop, from which to execute/develop our SNMP (with Perl) based tools. I admit I have a windows box somewhere... but I never use it. I get confused with that funky editor program which always confuses my vi shortcuts for content... yuck. The statement about Windows dominating telephony made me laugh, and prompted my first (and likely only) response to slashdot... Get a grip... Solaris dominates the telco, and always will. Forever. Sorry Bill, I will never consent to your fragile equipment providing carrier class service. Sorry Linus, you have a fun economical alternative, but honestly, the fault tolerant high-uptime, carrier grade MTBF equipment does not exist to support your OS, and Solaris is so ubiquitous that in the Telecommunications Industry Unix means Solaris.
The OS for the Intel Dot.Station(r) was RedHat, it does voice mail, speaker phone, as well as dial up access.
...even then there doesn't seem to much built around it or anyone using it. It reached a 1.0 release in September and was met with no fanfare.
So I'm supposed to bet the farm, our company, and MY job on recommending a 1.0 release of a pivotal tool that:
a) no one else uses
b) requires a massive $ investment to get off the ground
c) has only been out for 30 days.
d) has no support from the company that builds the call center respondent database.
Not likely.
If for whatever reason it craps out, we are out of business. I don't care so much about the operating system as I do the combination of operating system AND application. A crappy tool that runs under Linux is far, far worse than a good tool that runs under a properly administered Win2k OS.
Recommending Linux merely because it is Linux is a fast way to the unemployment line.
In addition to our WAN/LAN I also run a medium size phone switch (195 nodes / 16 IP Phones / 2 PRIs for switched access / 1 dedicated Long Distance T1). When you get to the corporate level you're buying a solution; not building one in house, because phones are essential to the day to day operation of the company. Period. I think generically when you say phone switch you're referring to everything telco past the demarc; switch T1s/PRIs, operate internal digital stations, provide analog lines, route calls, manage security, reporting/tracking/billing, Voicemail, Auto Attendants, Hunt Groups, Digital Faxing- the whole 7 layer enchilada. Few corporations are going to allow their IT departments to go the Slashdot way w/ so much on the line. A modern phone switch must reliably scale to thousands of nodes including IP devices, support Unified Messaging (receiving faxes & voice mails through PC), have reporting right out of the box, must be easy to use, and work on the first cut over. While the word 'easy' is certainly a very relative word- in my experience most geeks (a word of complimentary endearment in my vocabulary) can easily master telco while the reverse is not often true. Believe it or not, in the old days these were sometimes the roles of separate administrators / departments.
You're right that *nix is a perfect fit for all of this; remember Unix was invented at Bell Labs. The auxiliary applications are there; to support your phone switch you need to reliably record and report all activity across your switch for billing, acct. tracking, etc. I would guess that *nix runs the backbone.
If you'd like you can become a dealer for the company that claims to have 'the world's first Linux technology based voice processing' including Unified Messaging.
By the way I think that Bayonne is encompassed in the umbrella project of GNUComm; hopefully it's just a matter of time before someone finishes the Embedded Linux Phone Switch. As an incentive to anyone who develops and releases a free system: even used handsets cost big money for a particular phone switch; pick wisely 'cause you're most likely stuck with it for a little while. Caveat: you will most likely be pushed out of the market by softphones.
Since you're in the market and I just went through this myself contact me off list and I'll share my experience with Inter-Tel Technologies which is one of the fastest growing companies in the US (short version: no I don't work there and overall positive).
Great occasions do not make heroes or cowards; they simply unveil them to the eyes. -Bishop Westcott
The last (and only) telephony project I worked on ran on AIX. The software package we had didn't support rewinding to hear the last few seconds of a message, so I had to write some plug-in code that would be triggered when the rewind key was pressed, keep track of the current negative offset, and only play back the correct number of bytes from the stored wav file.
It was kind of nasty. Not because it was particularly difficult (although debugging required a group effort to make multiple incoming phone calls to test it thoroughly), but because it was, in a theoretical sense, totally unnecessary. No telephony software package that costs MONEY should lack a simple rewind-replay feature.
bytesmythe
Hypocrisy is the resin that holds the plywood of society together.
-- Scott Meyer
The telephone companies ought to take a serious look at FreeBSD. It's so much more stable and reliable and better suited for their purposes.
all that needs to be said here is that Linux IS in many telecommunication R&D labs and has been for quite some time. Actually, from my own experience, a variety of telecomm components (software and hardware products) will be run on Linux very soon. Drivers for dialogic cards have been done for quite some time now (another post mentioned 'em), even most of the debugging. The difference is that most telecomm companies haven't shared code or open sourced anything ever! So don't just expect this stuff to show up on sf.net anytime soon! One thing is certain, Linux will be one of the OSes running telco equipment from large (I'm talking huge) voicemail systems to the signaling network nodes all over the PSTN on every continent.
Check out www.mitel.com. Their 3050 is apparently a Linux based key switch/firewall package.
There was a plan at Avaya to use Linux for Definity or Audix - but ever since the market crash and layoff, there was not much plan on converting to Linux
Granted, a lot of what you said is subjective, and as you acknowledged, there is no point in arguing over opinion. Furthermore, I feel I understood what you said. In support of this, allow me to summarize your post: You a manager responsible for critical systems, and you absolutely do not modify your production environment without significant justification and complete risk-management.
..., etc.", but as "I do not have enough information about Linux and its tools to implement solutions for that platform". I firmly believe that _with proper procedures_ the appropriate Linux tools can be implemented in a risk-free way, its just a matter of knowing how to do it or knowing someone who does.
I don't think you're alone in that position. In fact, there are likely a number of Slashdot readers that are also responsible for business-critical systems. I even read an occasional story about businesses switching their mission-critical systems over to the Linux platform.
What this means is that even if you aren't comfortable with Linux, there are those in positions similar to yours that are, and they are growing their business in areas they could not otherwise.
It is possible that there does not exist a Linux application that could grow your business in any significant way. If the benefits of a change do not outweigh the effort involved, I admit it is a pointless modification.
However, if there exists a tool that could provably benefit your company, for example, by increasing profitability or decreasing the costs of operation, would you be biased against it because it runs on the Linux platform?
I am planning to start a business myself, and there is no part of it I would trust to the Windows platform. To use your words, I find it "loose, uncontrolled, and random". It does not suit my needs, and Linux does.
In closing, I interpreted your comment on the whole not as "Linux apps are too risky for me because of
I've been involved in many Large carrier switch control application platforms being delivered using Linux since 1994. Sprint was an early adopter in Asia. Hutchison Telecom also used Linux in their cellular network application switching platform. British Telecom deployed a worldwide unified messaging platform in 2000 that was controlled by Linux in the U.S.,U.K.,Japan, Australia, Norway, Spain, Italy and Germany. NTT used a Linux controlled calling card platform in Japan that ran well over 20,000,000 minutes per month. Embratel and Worldcom deployed the first carrier installed calling card platform in Brazil in 1999/2000 that was running a Linux based switch control platform. If I remember correctly the platform at Hutchison made it over 400 days without a reboot.
http://www.direct2internet.com/global/
use COTS IBM servers with their own custom linux kernel to do the cross from telephony protocols to TCP/IP.
No. Now go home.
once ipv6 is rolled out and qos starts becoming widespread, the internet will rapidly replace traditional phones.
Yes, there is a lot of crap software out there written to work with broooktrout and similar cards, but everything i've seen is complete fucking garbage. I worked at a place that had to write a ton of scripts (running from reliable Solaris systems) to restart the (typical shoddy Indian-produced windows garbage)software on the Windows systems whenever it stopped responding, typically 3-10 times per day. Also, we had devote extra NOC resources to manually rebooting these windows systems everytime the system decided to hang.
Windows and Telephony DO NOT MIX!
None of the VOIP companies I've dealt with used Windows for anything more than internal desktop systems, and perhaps some other stuff like MS exchange e-mail and IIS webservers for cheesy marketing crap. Windows is useless for VoIP
QUALCOMM (CDMA/wireless/etc) is entirely Unix based.. do/will they use Linux? I have no clue.. will they use windows? NO.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I did some work for an Australian telco. From what I saw, their stuff ran on big honking UNIX boxes running Digital Unix (ie OSF1). I don't think Linux has made many inroads in yet, but it may happen with time and shrinking budgets.
I have been working on combination web- and phone-based sweepstakes for the past year and all of our telephony is run on a RedHat system. It has never once been down and handles thousands of calls a day without breaking a sweat.
If you were my senior manager I would fire your ass. I'm a CTO.
I had thought it was the product of Chorus,a French company, but it looks like Sun bought them out in 1997.
The above page says that it isn't being sold any more, but IS available as a free, open source version.
Yippee!
Interestingly, I notice when the techs at work log in to our Alcatel OmniPBX, they are greeted by a banner indicating that it uses GNU software from the Linux operating system.
Either the front end box is running Linux, or, more likely, the fact that ChorusOS incorporates GNU tools, in which case strictly speaking the software is really from the GNU project, but interesting nonetheless.
Why's that free platforms don't perform well at Telephony servers? The Linux telephony is just not structured enough. Because there's not for Linux one guy who's going to application writers (ACD, pre-dialers etc) and telling them "Hey, we're going to build a soft-PBX platform which is going to enable you to sell applications for more platforms than today. We're going to build a Telephony API for ya, how do you want it to be?"
And then the same one guy gets to telephony H/W manufacturers and says "Hey, we're going to build a soft-PBX platform which is going to enable you to sell more stuff. Only thing we need to do is get the drivers right, and you wouldn't want to see your cards unusable with our platform. So we're counting on your help."
The key there is that when the middle-man (MS) says he's going to build a soft-PBX platform, others know they can rely on him because he's got an interest in the thing (selling more licences), so they actually help him out. Application developers and hardware manufacturers think alike: "Why invest into a relationship with a bunch of noncommitted hobbyists who have no clear interest in making the technology work? What if I don't like what they do, can I say anything? Why don't I just go with the guy whom I know shares an interest in the technology? And in the end, you've got a system running and everyone finding a way to profitability.
It's a partnership between people or companies that works.
I think it's more of a mystery why certain free projects perform so well rather than why many fail.
Mitel does indeed use a linux variant. Their 3100/3300 ICP Platforms (targeted at small to mid-size businesses) uses VxWorks as its operating system. We are nearing the deployment phase using the 3340 (remote branch office solution) and the 3300 (as the main unit) for a large medical facility - deploying over 200+ phones. Its stable and we've had no problems with VxWorks as the base OS. So I guess I would say it's mainly Cisco that's chosen to use Win boxes as their base OS for AVVID.
Why? Simple: it was dictated by the hardware we used. To support a few hundred VOIP connections, you need to offload work like the codecs and in some cases the H.323 stack to DSPs and CPUs on the cards. These cards -- usually CompactPCI -- are very expensive. These cards don't give you a lot of choice on the platform to run: "you can have any color as long as it's black."
If you want telephony to use free OSs, talk to the vendors -- e.g. Dialogic (now Intel). Natural Microsystems (NMS) actually does release Linux drivers now (it didn't two years ago, Solaris was the only Unix available) but it's doubtful Intel ever will.
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
I run Mandrake and Red Hat at home.
That says it all. I bet that you DON'T put the latest version of Solaris on a production server farm the moment it comes out, either. Apply the same conservatism to Linux, and you will be rewarded.
soo to support yahoo ... hehehe
I recently worked as a developers of
Avaya's call processing software which runs on
Linux-based PBX. All high-end PBX from Avaya are
Linux-based. Low end are Win2000 based. Same
software runs on all platforms. The Linux core is
Red Hat 6.2 with kernel 2.2.14 and Reiserfs as
the filesystem on Pentium3 machines.
Avaya is the largest vendor for enterprise-class
PBX and it does VoIP.
My company, Voicetronix, (www.voicetronix.com) sells computer telephony hardware for open source operating systems. Our customers have deployed thousands of ports in real world, production applications around the world.
Lots of companies (mine included) use OpenH323 for production telephony. Our system routes tens of thousands of calls per day, and it uses Linux, MySQL, OpenH323, Apache and lots of other Open Source software. Disclaimer: I am one of the co-authors of OpenH323
I haven't been able to try it, but this might have what you are looking for.
http://vocp.sourceforge.net/index.html
Forgive the anonyous posting, my slashdot password isn't working today.
Greg
As someone who has been working with the telephony industry for more than 15 years I find your "the industry is going to NT/Windows" cry to be far more alarmist than reality indicates.
... the heavy lifting is still left predomenately to UNIXen and Vaxen (and a host of other more obscure OSes).
... though I have encountered them mostly in Europe and Asia. Even in these environments, Linux is still considered primarily a baby Unix and is not used to host actual switching platforms ... though it is being used for control & management and billing systems.
... many of the next generation of 'soft switches' are hosted on UNIX platforms [removing the need to maintain many of the obscure, aging OSes ;)]
;)
It's true that it is much easier to find NT/Windows in a NOC or operations network these days; they typically serve as platforms for reporting, remote graphical configuration interfaces, desktop workstations, etc.
Linux and Open/FreeBSD can be found in telephony networks
Finally, the role of UNIX in telephony is becoming more central (or core if you would)
So, the news of UNIX's demise is perhaps a little premature.
Natty
Maybe the rain Isn't really to blame. So I'll remove the cause, But not the symptom!
First and foremost I'm a wireless guy, landline is pretty much a black hole to me these days....
Telecom has been undergoing many changes at the lowest levels for a few years. Most UNIX systems in telephony are used as SCP's (Signaling / Service control points) / HLR's VLR's.. etc. A SCP will provide a service such as SMS, E-911, prepay, or something over the SS7 network. The SS7 network is at the lowest levels very similar to DAP, being a heavyweight protocol that requires its own circuits (ISDN, T1, ATM, etc.). While SS7 has been fabulous for creation of large and wonderful telecom networks it is becoming harder and harder to find people who understand even the basics of it. What's worse is the SS7 solutions of yesteryear (produced by say Lucent, NewNet, and Tandem) are no more. The newer SS7 solutions (say SignalWare, Distributed7, etc.) haven't really been able to cut the mustard. Things have been getting worse for a while, and people know it... but the fine people at ANSI and IEEE, Lucent, Nortel, IBM, and the like have come up with a solution. Make SS7 lightweight (I.e. IP based like LDAP).
Many things have happened in order to get SS7 (a very demanding protocol indeed) to work over IP. The first milestone was essentially dumping TCP for SCTP/IP. Much has been going on in this realm, the lk-sctp project has been busily cranking out code for the 2.5 series kernel, and will likely make Linux one of the first *NIX based operating systems to have a NATIVE SCTP implementation. Adding SS7 to the top of this is about as easy as creating an SCTP daemon.
While SCTP and the Sigtran suite of protocols (M3UA / SUA ) are moving ahead quickly there are other projects that are working on implementing a heavyweight implementation of SS7 - such as openss7, and even the PBX / softswitch project asterisk.
While all this may be nice and good, it may be worth noting that Inet Inc. has an SS7 network monitoring solution called GeoProbe. While some parts of the system run on a solaris server the actual cardcages and "proprietary" equipment actually run Linux. (at over 300k a site, that's a pretty big win for Linux).
As always I'd love to hear what's going on in other sectors of telecom with Linux.
After a company pays that, Microsoft looks like a deal.
The 3B20 was a bit-slice architecture that predated the WE-32000 and 32100 microprocessor chips in the 3B2/3B5/3B15 series. It was roughly a VAX-780 class machine, i.e. about 1 MIPS and two refrigerators for the main computer plus another for the UPS (4 truck batteries...) The 3B20 Duplex machines had two CPUs running two halves of an operating system (which was DMERT rather than UNIX, but had a UNIX layer on top of it) - you could upgrade the OS while the thing was running.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
I asked a friend of mine involved in this who is also a big proponent of Linux and he sent me this reply and said I could post it. (Shameless attempt at adding karma):
/. login) is that Intel wants to make inroads in the carrier space and they are working on what they call "carrier grade" linux. The development is being done in conjunction with the open source develpoer lab www.osdl.org and the service availability forum www.saforum.org."
"Ok. Basically I would say that most of what was discussed was accurate. Windows 2000 dominates the enterprise/call center telephony space. Solaris on UltraSparc dominates the carrier/service provider (especially in the SoftSwitch SIP/MGCP arena). Of the enterprise Linux solutions, I would say that vovida.org looks like they are the real deal. I have not been that impressed with asterix (even with the input of the GAIIM developer). The only other inroad that I would mention (can't decide if I should dig up my
When did my printers start reading slash?
Locutus! Get back in queue!!
Linux is/has been used in enterprise telephony. As far back as 1997 I deployed a prepaid calling card system which used Linux as well as two other operating systems to serve real-time call authorization and call rating transactions for the prepaid system of a national carrier in SE Asia. This was all done using an off the shelf version of Linux, some slick C coding, and desktop hardware. Hard to believe - perhaps, but it's true. It goes to show what you can do if you are willing to put faith in your own skills, trust the open source technology, and not worry about having a third party to blame/sue if everything goes pear shaped.
Let's face it, if things get so bad that you have resorted to pointing fingers rather than fixing your production problems, then you're probably effectively out of business already. I wish I could give more details, but it's probably not in my best interests.
Hmmm... A year ago I got a phone call from my US counterpart about a "PC" that was spreading Nimda.
Turned out that it was the PABX control system. It didn't run any virus protection software, because all antivirus software tested brought down the software.
Now, here's the horrible bit. The PABX itself is a solid bit of engineering, with an ASCII only bit of RS232 based interface controlling it. If those bits had even remotely been documented, anyone with experience with something as simple as expect could have coded up an interface to it in a day at most -- much less time than what was invested in bringing the Windows interface to it on line.
To this date, we're not using the advanced features of the system because just getting it to work right on the supported platform turned out to be too great a nightmare to offset the possible gains from it.
PABX interfaces are the prototypical illustration of why documenting the low level interface can benefit the advanced user without impeding sales of the "integrated" windows "solution" to customers who can deal with interfacing Windows stuff. We're as shortstaffed in Windows DDE skills as we are in low level Unix stuff, but if the RS232 interface had been documented, we could've assessed the risks and benefits of talking directly to the hardware and make an informed decision on which group should handle the PABX interface and which tools to use.
The PABX is basically on life support, because the bundled apps suck and implementing a simple toolkit that covers our basic needs is impossible for lack of docs. That, in management terms, is a "lose-lose" proposition.
Bert Driehuis -- All I asked was a friggin' rotatin' chair. Throw me a bone here, people.
I've worked for a few telephony companies in my time. . .two that stick out succinctly in regards to Linux are Priority Call (makers of Oryx) and Boston Communications (do the pre-paid calling back-end to most large cell carriers).
Priority Call (http://www.prioritycall.com) makes an uber-trunk-switch that does all types of cool stuff from one-number-anywhere to pre-paid calling to massive e-mailed voice-mail to web voicemail -- it is the swiss army knife of telephony (thier main competitor, BTW is Comverse). Priority Call has sold switches to the likes of Bell Atlantic and a lot of Mexican and South American cell vendors).
Anyway, their systems were passive-backplane PIIs (at the time) with Dialogic (owned by Intel) ISA-bus switch boards (Dialogic boards also have thier own bus to interconnect them to aide the ISA bus) and Mylex RAID controllers runnning 9 Seagate Cheetahs. They used SCO OpenServer because SCO was just about the only telephony OS 'back in the day' and it was pretty stable. As a side note they also legally used a fair amount of OSS in Oryx, including a hacked-up apache and ncurses.
SCO OpenServer, though, has not been actively developed on for a *long* time and not only does it show its age, but frankly it is just about the worst OS I have ever worked on (I don't mean to flame you OpenServer-lovers out there). Support was a bitch. Bug-fixing was a bitch becuase SCO was not longer developing OpenServer not to mention that later versions of OpenServer were hacks to old ones in attempt to add new features without the proper architecture. As much as I want to flame I'll leave my beef with OpenServer at that.
Needless to say the limitations of OpenServer were apparent and they found that *it does not scale* well at all. Thus, they moves their home-brew proprietary Oryx database to Tru64 using rack-mounted Alphaserver DS10s and kept OpenServer for the fron-end and switching to keep migration smooth (Comverse, BTW, uses Tru64 on Alphas -- which this whole push by HP to move to HPUX is going to really piss off a lot of telephony companies). For massive installs they used Sun Netra T-1s in a customer-specific manner.
Later, they finally realized that not only did OpenServer SUCK, but it was *expensive* too ($500 a copy). Thus they started to port to Linux and wrapped it into one massive migration strategy that included new hardware (Compact-PCI).
The fact of the matter is that people hate change. People complained about how Linux companies weren't doing so well not to mention that run-of-the-mill support people FEAR UNIX and the migration from the OpenServer database to the Tru64 was painful (had to re-do all the flow-chart-like step-by-step hold-my-hand this-is-how-to-use-unix cutsheets for some people)
My manager at the time (and the best manager I have ever had) sold Linux -- simply stated, "who cares if the Linux companies go under -- what is better security then HAVING THE SOURCE CODE TO THE WHOLE OS!). During the port, though, Linux had a few limitations that slowed the deployment:
1) OpenServer is such a hacked beast that porting to Linux from it was non-trivial.
2) Dialogic (the heart of the telecomm industry) did not make Linux drivers at the time. Thus they decided to move to NMS (Dialogic competitor) cards
that did support Linux as well as Compact PCI.
3) At the time Linux did not support hot-plug PCI which was one of the design specs and the main reason for moving to Compact PCI.
4) Not even NMS would ship source-code drivers -- only compiled modules. THIS IS A BIG THING as one can only run stock RedHat kernels or specific versions they support or else you'll get unresolved symbols or flakiness in the drivers. Face it, the stock RedHat kernel is *not* meant for telephony. Not only that, but the whole security argument of having the source code to the OS is negated because if NMS for some odd reason decided to stop developing Linux drivers then the company would be stuck with one version of Linux forever.
In the end it was not Linux's limitations that killed the migration but the fact that they rolled the whole migration into the massive hardware/software roll-over and when hard economic times hit and the person who spear-headed the project left, those that hate change won and the whole project was scrapped (some people think it is better to live with what you know versus venturing into the unknown, right?)
In summary, the things that I think would help adotion of Linux in the telecomm world are:
1) Above all else, open-source NMS or Dialogic drivers. People fear Linux companyies instability too much and if their vendor decided to stop supporting Linux it would screw them.
-OR-
2) A company come about that makes hard-core telecomm-grade switch boards with open source drivers that gives Dialogic a run for its money. I'm not talking about the "internet phone jack" guys, I'm talking about boards that can handle dozens on trunks (read T-1s). Dialogic used to be the main reason for companies not adopting Linux because they basically own the PC-based telephony market and they used to ONLY speak NT and SCO and trust me, as much as I hate to say it NT is better then OpenServer from a support and development point of view (although OpenServer is more stable then NT).
3) Keep moving forward with Linux on the desktop. Most people to this day *fear* UNIX and if Linux can be made common and user-friedly the managment types (and support types) that fear change will be less reluctant to let the engineers use Linux. It sounds convoluted, but this is how MS did it. Linux on the desktop indirectly helps all those who want to convince managment to use Linux a LOT as it shows that support costs will not be as high
as it is 'user-friendly' and they can hire monkey support cheap.
4) Linux clustering. Linux NEEDS good high-availibility open-source clustering. No matter how good your hardware is you can not get the telecomm "five nines" of uptime with one computer! A good first move would be a good filesystem that supports mutiple hosts sharing one fibre channel array.
Why do telephony companies migrate to NT/2000?
1) Tru64 is dead thanks to HP.
2) People are starting to fear that Solaris will go the way of Tru64 and future migrations are *very* expensive.
3) People fear UNIX and support costs are high due to this fear (need more geeky support people).
4) Dialogic only used to speak OpenServer and NT (I don't know if it is the same any more). NT is by far the lesser of the two evils in development and support (not reliability).
4) Managment fears Linux companies instability because they are thinking in the 'old school' support issue -- if a vendor goes under and you can't buy support your company is screwed. Please, educate them that HAVING THE SOURCE CODE TO THE WHOLE OS is teh best security. And please coerce NMS or Dialogic to make open-source drivers as their proprietary drivers negate the last argument!!!
As for Boston Communications, I did support for them and they used NT. That was one of the worst nightmares I have ever experienced. Try remotely managing hundreds of telecomm nodes all over the country over 56K frame-relay links using Remotely Possible (PC Anywhere clone). Not to mention the BSODs and managment blaming you when they could not report "five nines" to the carriers and thus had to pay them mucho $$.
There are a number of pieces of hardware sold by various telco equipment vendors that use Linux under the hood. It's not that well known because its not the OS that they publicise, its the applications.
When combined with hardware redundancy, Linux can be used for "carrier grade" reliability numbers (ie in the 99.999% uptime range). Of course this is not your basic off-the-shelf Redhat distro, we had to do some major modifications. Montavista is pushing what they call their carrier grade linux distribition which has a fair number of improvements, and there is an alliance of vendors called the "Carrier Grade Linux Working Group" that is trying to put together some standards.
Nortel produces a product called the Succession Communication Server 2000-Compact. It's a full VoIP softswitch, runs linux, and specs available on google give half a million call attempts per hour as of this time last year. We're more than double that now, on 500MHz processors. Think about that--that's less than 500 cpu cycles to handle a call attempt. Not a lot of code bloat there...
Basically what's happening is that some of the guts of the telephony network is running linux (albeit invisibly) but the edge applications haven't really come yet. I think it'll eventually happen though.
About the only thing I can think of is the fact that Linux distros generally install the kitchen sink, and FreeBSD prefers to make you add ports/packages yourself. But with a custom install (and a script to duplicate it), that can be taken care of.
Is it some sort of "stability" issue? What kind of stability? How often are you going to be playing with expect/send pairs in a chat script to get PPP working on a production telephony box? Maybe it's API "stability"... in which case I'm obliged to point out that FreeBSD currently only emulates the 4.3BSD syscalls (see COMPAT_43 in your kernel config.)
It obviously can't be anything to do with commercial support, because Linux gets far more of that than all of the BSDs.
Would you mind enlightening me?
~~~LXT~~~
Life is like a computer program: anything that can't happen, will.
In the emerging world of softswitches, the bulk of those are running Solaris on Sun workstations. Also, if the "softswitch" stack is sold to another company that actually write the wrapper application to get billing stats, etc., its mostly likely on some flavor of *nix.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT Call 1-800-555-CARL
First off where did you get 64 channels per T1?? Last time I checked it's been 24 channels for about 40 years! Second off, the telephony network is based on SS7, which is one of most widely used, reliable and redundant protocols every created. Don't get me wrong packetized voice is being used within most of the long-haul telecom network. However, the difference is it's a private network that can be controlled and monitored just for that purpose. To say that the Bells are not using VOIP because they don't want to upgrade is not true. They are using it, although, not without problems. It simply hasn't matured into a reliable protocol. Within a controlled environment it works ok, but the sound quality is not as good as SS7. VOIP has huge potential but it's an immature technology.
Oh good, I had a horrible feeling I was in for a flame-war. Thanks for proving me wrong on that point!
However, if there exists a tool that could provably benefit your company, for example, by increasing profitability or decreasing the costs of operation, would you be biased against it because it runs on the Linux platform?
Yes, I'm sorry to say, I would be biased against it because it runs on Linux. If it was really good, I'd look at getting it to work on, for example, FreeBSD with the Linux Compatibility bits, but I'd have to have a long hard think before I'd put a Linux OS in a business production environment.In closing, I interpreted your comment on the whole not as "Linux apps are too risky for me because of ..., etc.", but as "I do not have enough information about Linux and its tools to implement solutions for that platform". I firmly believe that _with proper procedures_ the appropriate Linux tools can be implemented in a risk-free way, its just a matter of knowing how to do it or knowing someone who does.
Kinda sorta... ish. It's not quite like that. I have issues with Linux because (1) it's not an OS, it's just a kernel, and (2) if you do take the position the Linux is an OS, then there are so many different Linuxes - which one is the right, stable, properly designed, maintained and managed OS for my business?
It is a question without an answer, AFAICS.
I find your ideas intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
check out CGL
Um, last time I heard bell labs practically invented Unix. Hmm, what do you think those 25 million dollar, Nortel and Lucent switches are running on? Doesn't take a smart guy to figure that one out now does it.
Yes it is. We've been selling the stuff for over a year. There are about 3000+ systems in the field running in an in-skin system, i.e. a board that plugs directly into the switch (PBX). There is also a stand-alone system available. http://www.1cti.com/index.asp
Nortel Networks is most likely the largest manufacturer of telephony equipment, both TDM and VoIP. All of their PBXs, all of their key systems, and almost all of their VoIP systems run on VxWorks. Its laughable that some VoIP vendors claim five 9s of reliability on a platform with an OS as unreliable as Windows. Nobody should seriously consider an enterprise telephony platform built on Windows.
...Solaris, so at least it's a nix.
I work at one of the largest IVR dating companies in the US and we're Solaris across the board. Before that we were Netware.
I have some mild familiarity with what our competition is running and they have pretty much the same setup, I don't think any of the big boys run IVRs on W2K. May make sense though if it was just a small office voicemail system.
But sleep easy linux-zealot, if it's on one unix, it's on them all.
UMM, I think that Bell labs basically invinted
Unix. What software do you think those 20 million dollar Lucent and Nortel switches are running on?
The reason why is that true geeks know that voice communication has no proper place in the world.
May we never see th
What do you think those 20 million dollar Lucent and Notel Switches are using? I'll take Unix for $300, Bob.
Fundamentally, because FreeBSD is an Operating System.
As you've guessed by now, I subscribe to the train of thought that Linux is *not* an OS. Red Hat is an OS, Mandrake is an OS, Caldera is an OS, Debian is an OS. Linux is just a kernel.
Why is this an issue for me from a commercial point of view? Well, with FreeBSD, I get to go back to one group for any issues. The whole thing, kernel, binaries, packages, - the works - is managed and documented as one single entity.
If I go Linux, I've made a kernel decision. FWIW, I believe that the Linux nothing short of a bloody brillian kernel. What lets Linux down in my eyes is the operating systems that use it. I have to choose which one, then I need to be convinced that the vendor is committed, that the vendor manages the system well, that I'm not going to be faced with "we didn't design that part" finger pointing wars when I have issues...
I hasten to add that FreeBSD isn't, IMNSHO, the grand solution either. In fact, FreeBSD is annoying the shit out of me right now. I cut my teeth on BSD boxen way-back-when, I'm a BSD boy at heart. Still, as I intimated earlier, my home runs on Linux. I have Mandrake/Intel and Cobalt Qube/MIPS boxes as servers, and Red Hat for a desktop. There are no up/running BSD boxes of any description here.
Why? 'cos the Qube was a freebie \, Mandrake proved itself be be a good server in lieu of a suitable BSD, and Red Hat seemed like a good thing to play with for a desktop. FreeBSD got the arse because the interrupt code in the PCI stuff is broken, and the PCI-PCMCIA bridge stuff I need to make my wireless gear work, doesn't.
On the other hand, I can't afford to be so fickle at work. I need a whole OS with a strong design and project management behind it. That's why, as I said, Solaris, FreeBSD, HP-UX gets the vote. Two of those are commercial products with the incumbent entity-to-point-lawyers-at that senior management loves so much. The other has proven itself to me.
About the only thing I can think of is the fact that Linux distros generally install the kitchen sink, and FreeBSD prefers to make you add ports/packages yourself.
To be honest, that's something that I think most of the Linux based OS's do better than FreeBSD does. FreeBSD invites you to pick a generic build, and, as you say, installs the kitchen sink. Many of the Linux OS's offer much better control
At, I might add, the cost of speed. Scripting is the solution of course, but I can still have a good working FreeBSD system up and running (including custom kernel config and compile) in less time than Windows 98 can be installed (bad comparison, I know, but I raced a guy once, that's how I know!). On the other hand, I've had way too many two and three hour missions installing some Linuxes. Not good.
Is it some sort of "stability" issue? What kind of stability?
In a way, yes. It's the kernel -vs- whole OS thing, and the business-comfort that comes with it.
I find your ideas intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
http://www.steadycom.com.au/products.htm
Steadycom/Pracom have a service creation suite, runs on lots of *n?x platforms, including Linux.
What gave you the impression that I'd work for you?
I find your ideas intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Hi,
I work for the biggest telecommunication enterprise in Canada and we migrate our SCO servers to Linux (Redhat 7.x). We have a LOT of servers across Quebec and Ontario.
We use Dialogic and NMS cards with T1. We provides many real-time applications on it for all clients that use a Vista 350 (or similar) screenphones or wireless phones. On our servers, we also run text to speech and speech recognition applications.
We saw a big improvement in our servers performance and reliability.
PS: Sorry for my bad english.
I do telecom too, and from what I've seen
you've got a pretty unique setup. From what
you've described you have some completely
custom software. Any chance of unleashing it
on the world?
----- obSig
The definition of an operating system has been debated for decades, so I'll not touch on that except to say whether it is an OS, a kernel, or both, for me it is a means to an end. Linux + apps (e.g., Apache, bash, gcc, etc.) allow me to do the things I need to do more efficiently than I could on the Windows platform.
(2) ... there are so many different Linuxes - which one is the right, stable, properly designed, maintained and managed OS for my business? It is a question without an answer, AFAICS.
Actually, there is only one "Linux", but there are numerous distributions (i.e., Linux + apps). I believe IBM makes good money answering this very question. Companies are fortunate if they have Unix (Linux, BSD, etc.) users on staff as they can draw upon the experience of their employees in this domain without paying $$$ for outside expertise.
The task of a manager is more than maintenance, it is one of vigilance -- always keeping an eye out for better ways to do things. And since one can't be omniscient, it is often necessary to draw upon the expertise of others. Don't reject the question because you can't answer it; just talk to those that can and do answer it on a daily basis.
As it happens, I will be implementing new functionality for my employer's old 486-based Dialogic ISA phone system (they don't want to spring for newer PCI-based hardware). As part of the process, it is necessary to migrate from DOS to RedHat 7.2 -- putting my money where my mouth is, so-to-speak.
companies that deal in telephony only want one thing: the product should work with little interaction.
this does not happen very often with linux apps of any flavour. that being said, the communications company i work for (name Vithheld) deals mostly with SCO and OS/2 or QNIX (crazy canadians) for ACD and voicemail respectively... i've tried pitching the linux angle plenty of times, but go back to my first point if you want to know why it didnt work out...
-v
I think you are looking for carrier grade Linux like this Hard Hat distro.
This isn't your little PBX linux though, this is for serious telecom apps with five 9's reliability (99.999%) which is the equivalent of 5 minutes downtime a year.
because you can't even get a simple winmodem to work with it.
Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
when this shows up on the same day.
I worked at Interact, Inc. the largest supplier of teleco grade VIP (Voice and Information Processing) platforms for a couple years. When I initially started there we used primarily SCO Unix on x86 hardware with Aculab and Dialogic telephony cards. I and a few others evangelized Linux profusely--along with porting to C++ from straight C. Eventually, the hardware vendors started to release drivers on Linux circa 1999. Around late 2000 the core telephony engine was ported over to C++ on Linux and they've been extremely happy about that decision ever since.
I remember meeting with Dialogic representatives once and they questioned our plans for Windows platforms and why we did use it, and we all got to just laugh and laugh. Our systems never have the option of rebooting.
*blush*
As a matter a fact, our company, Axialys Interactive, uses an in-house developed platform called Axiavoice to manage IVR services. We do DTMF navigation, voice synthesisis, voice recognition (these two ones using third party software), and VoiceXML (using OpenVXI).
It works under Linux, and has been used 24/7 for almost two years here. It's now handling 30+ E1 PRIs in our datacenter. That's 900 voice channels.
We use T1/E1 boards that are *way* cheaper that their Dialogic/NMS equivalents.
And the whole thing is 100% open sourced, although we didn't commit a lot of time to publicizing and packaging our stuff.
Check out www.axiavoice.org, or write me (nbougues@axialys.net) if interested.
Exactly what is your question? I find it interesting that MS finally comes out with their soft phone and your psting appears. If you are really in the telephony industry, then you would know that all of the heavy stuff runs on som form of unix. The small server is all over the board. the client stuff has been mainly win or sco, but that is changing. But who exactly are you and why the interest in telephony?
I can tell you that here in Norway, Telenor
and Song Networks use Linux on their servers for
telecom, not voicemail though, but lots of systems
related to call handeling, billing, CDR handeling and such. Though they use Linux for many tasks and systems, it's still dominated by Solaris.
You all sound like a bunch of blind men describing an elephant by touch. Some of you are describing the trunk as representing the whole, some are desribing a leg, some are describing the side. Unix and linux fits into many places in the telecom industry. Microsoft also fits in, but as the dung heap behind the elephant. Keep feeling.
The company that I last worked for produced it's own hardware, all of which was supported under a variety of OSs, including Sun Solaris, SCO OpenServer, Windows NT (urgh) and Linux. They design their own SS7 hardware, and because they are a fairly small company, were required to satisfy their customers demands. Customers wanted support on a range of operating systems, including Linux, so they got it. Their website, for those that are interested, is here
Well this is not exactly on topic but close enough.
Ericsson use Linux in TSP/TelORB, s subsystem to the AXE-switch. (This is stuff for the upcoming 3G networks.
snipped from http://www.telorb.com/
TelORB and Linux
A TelORB based system can contain a number of processors using the Linux operating system, in addition to the ones running the TelORB OS. On these processors any third party software can be easily introduced. By adding the unique TelORB middleware to the Linux OS, the Linux processors are full members of the TelORB cluster and are thus also controlled by the TelORB cluster management functions. This means for instance that the internal communication mechanism in the TelORB cluster, IPC, is available as library routines that can be used from applications on the Linux machines as well. The same goes for the built in in-memory database and the cluster configuration mechanisms, which drastically improves availability for the parts of an application running on the Linux parts of the system.
By combining the unique performance of TelORB with the worldwide accepted Linux OS we get a system where extremely high availability is achievable without any sacrifices regarding performance.
VoiceGenie build a great line of VXML servers. Originally they used SCO but have recently migrated to using Linux.
UniSys build a lot of test systems from pretty much every kind of boxen you can imagine. They pick ASR/TTS/VXMLi from loads of different people or just make their own. They have a lot of customers and are always looking at new solutions. I met the guy who has this job, lucky guy. And, yes, they use windows too.
I think you might find Pipebeach using Linux but I haven't heard from them in a while, don't quote me on this one.
Wiggly -- But I want to be different, just like everybody else.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=3041
I sent this contact to Magee a while ago after a dinner conversation that floored me. The person was dropping hints at me for MONTHS about something happening, and one day, he told me that Avaya outright dumped NT/2K for linux on everything. Windows will be supported for basically as long as existing clients want it (years and years and years), but from now on, everything is linux.
I asked for a press release, and was pointed to an utterly forgetable announcement that never mentioned linux, or that MS was on the shitlist, it was sad. When I went back to the source, he told me that 1) yes it was the correct release, and 2) it was indead a total shift from one to the other. Like the Inq aricle says, it was not a snap decision, or a vapor release, it was developed, tested, and debugged for 18 months before it was... err.. not announced with no fanfare.
Overall, the products are quite real, you can buy them, they run linux, and have displaced MS. Yay. Next niche to conquer is......?
-Charlie
There are/were several switches, not just Definity.
I worked with the INDeX switch, which to my mind had a much better user interface on the handsets than the Definity. I understand it was more reasonably priced too. We tried making decent APIs for call centres using Windows (though since we went from RS-232 to ethernet other O/Ss would be feasible if anyone used them). Even so, the software teams and firmware teams did lack coordination, so the code underneath the API was a bit like a swan madly paddling under water.
At my new job we have an INDeX switch; it would seem a shame if it got swallowed by Avaya into a big amorphous Definity mess.
Hint to new boss: don't fire me. Every time I leave a job the stock price goes through the floor a few months afterwards!
Lynux Works has just announced that it will support the Open Source Development Lab's Carrier-Grade Linux® specification (CGL) v1.0 and that it plans to features of CGL v1.0 into BlueCat® Linux, in early 2003. The details here (Press release).
The OpenCall series are telco servers such as SS7 servers (OCSS7), SMS servers (50% of the SMS flow is using HP servers), SIP servers (OCSIP), Voice servers (OCMP)... All are running on HPUX, and linux is on the current target. You can find linux sdk of the OCSS7 on hp' corporate site. I think sun is selling the same kind of product on solaris. more info http://www.hp.com/communications/opencall/
I am part of a tema developing a performance management tool for telecommunication companies througout the world.
Most wired telecommunication companies use Windows NT but don't mind if we tell them we will install our product on their networks in unix.
Yet, I am still to meet a single mobile telecommunications company that doesn't use Solaris and that will even allow us to install a single NT machine on their network.
I am aware of a few Telephony boxes using QNX.
One voicemail machine was made by Centigram; it would answer 48 phone lines at once, play outgoing
and record incoming messages, and talk to me (the tech) while generating reports---all simultaneoously, with no discernable delays. This was an older machine with two (old)scsi drives.
The other machines were specialised devices to supply a particular service (voice mail, phone patches, special signalling, gateways to other incompatible networks, etc...)
I'm involved in an academic-industrial project with a company whose main business is providing linux-based telephony systems. They include voice-mail, switchboard services, fax receipt and a bunch of other related stuff from linux servers they install and maintain in the customer's premises. See http://www.smtnet.co.uk/ and look at their efinity server for information on what they do with it. Some, but possibly not all, of the software they ship on the boxes, is fully open source. They sell the boxes and the support services for their primary income. Dr Andrew A. Adams Lecturer in Systems Engineering The University of Reading
Web-based? In that case, Linux on the server lest your PABX get CodeRedded. IRL, marketroids would still drown the web pages in half-broken JavaScript like they do with the little routers - but at least there's a half-decent server platform involved.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
...but your tagline said...
Microsoft obtains a lot of its revenue by coercion as well. If you object to that, surely it should influence you decision even if Windows apparently does a better job.
Er, `Open Source: it's the difference between trust and antitrust?' (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
in the European pbx market the Alcatel Omnipcx Office is the first commercial pbx linux-based, it is modular, and has a very clear and simple (and working!!) Voip implementation.
sorry, is not available in north america....
when our license expired here for our Trivium call-logging system, I took it upon myself to build a complete call logger and reporter on a Linux box. It's pretty basic really; a simple script takes data captured from the TTY port and dumps it to a Microsoft SQL server (though I deliberately wrote the code so that it would be portable to other SQL servers, most notably Sybase).
Periodically, the reporting engine pulls data from the SQL server, generates it into a nice HTML report and sends it to our sales manager, CEO... and a copy to me to make sure it worked as expected.
Because it was Perl, I was also able to write a little Apache-based reporter, so a sales rep wanting to know how many calls he's made and to whom over a certain period can run a report as they desire.
It works pretty well, though it's still very much a work-in-progress... (the latest bug I found was in totalling up duration of calls I had somehow managed to code 61 minutes into an hour so the numbers were a little off... oops!)
I work for a large vendor of voicemail systems and voice portals that sells directly to the telcos.
Our product is currently WinNT-based. Our marketing people are telling us that none of the carriers want Windows-based solutions. They want UNIX-based solutions and preferably Linux.
As a result, we are porting a bunch of our software from WinNT to linux.
One problem has been the lack of support from 3rd party vendors. Telephony board vendors, voice recognizer vendors and TTS vendors seem to prefer Windows over Solaris over Linux. Even though many of them list linux as being supported, when push comes to shove they support their windows products better than their UNIX products, even going so far as to say "yeah, we ported to linux, but performance is worse and we don't really plan on supporting it until we see customers." Nuance is an example.
At that point it devolves into a chicken and egg problem.
Where does everyone go online to learn about phone information? I know that stealing a manual out of a lineman's truck is the best route to go for this one but their has to be some good sites out there dedicated ot telephony. Heres a chance to plug your site phreaks.
I worked for three years at the biggest telephony billing system vendor, Amdocs, the Israeli company that support Ensemble, the billing system that operates most of US POTS calls and most of the European GSM ones, besides being the dominant player at cell phones in places as South Korea and elsewhere.
.Net instead.
Amdocs started as a pretty much technical savy company, with a Unix system to do yellow pages layout. Delivering this system leveraged them to do the billing systems for the Baby Bells, when they got mainframe and data processing knowledge. It was GNU friendly, using most of the GNU toolchain such as gcc, GNU make, RCS and so on.
Supporting cell phone billing could have deepened open systems commitment, because these systems again run in Unix systems, mainly HP-UX. But the interface was done in Sybase PowerBuilder, as opposed to the POTS "Philishave" 3278 terminals.
After big money arrived, MBAs took power. Text processing was migrated from Unix WordPerfect to MS WinWord, and it is a pain to browse technical documentation in MS Word, I tell ya. Technically-savy people migrated to better jobs or higher up in the corporate foodchain, and today very little of the staff has even an IT background. Most don't even know the tools they use enough to be able to evaluate something else, and even the GNU tools in use are left to rot. People are still using GNU Emacs 19, RCS use was never upgraded to CVS or something else, and people are generally wary of the GNU commitment due to a lack of understanding.
The option of porting the PowerBuilder programs to run under POSIX and X Window System was never explored, instead "smart" clients are going Citrix MetaFrame, that at least gives them the option of using X Window System at the desktop, but I never heard of one that does.
The billing system back-end is always a commercial Unix, generally HP-UX. It is seriously misused, with a stupid multilingual setup that complicates administration and consumes resources as many times as there are languages supported. I've seen a billing system in a small GSM operator that needed to support interfaces in four different languages using up two SuperDomes, where a more intelligent system would have taken at most half such a system!
Needless to say, the predominance of HP as a hardware and OS vendor does not encourage alternatives to MS, as HP itself is deeply commited to a "MS everywhere, Unix where strictly necessary" policy. That's why they need and support Samba so much: they gave up on open systems desktops a long time ago.
There were unofficial talks of supporting GNU/Linux, but until I left there nothing came of it except a small intranet webcam server... when I setup a spare PC as squid cache to save on bandwidth it was no sooner discovered by supervision than took offline, even if half the office, including system analysts, programmer and project managers depended on it to read technical documentation and surf.
All telephony operators I visited while at Amdocs, in South America and Europe, were pretty much married to MS, using MS Exchange as email servers and that is it. They generally use MS all over the place, eventually migrating some web server or other non-critical system to Apache or HP-UX because of reliability; but when something delicate as MS Exchange breaks, the standard answer is to just throw more resources at it. Technical and historical discussion on open vs proprietary systems is generally discouraged as disruptive of chosen directions. The preferred platform for development is Java, but there is strong pressure to consider MS
Many managers are completely uneducated on both general culture and Informatics, so all this is quite unlikely to change soon, unless GNU systems make a big splash either on cost, support and scalability on the back end or on ease-of-use, resources consumption and interoperability on the desktop.
The bright side is that there is one or other small non-critical back end system being evaluated on GNU/Linux, usually SuSe, Mandrake or Red Hat. Few people even heard of free software or Debian, mostly it comes from some daring software vendor or a curious underling as myself.
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
Oh no, that would be *me* for only reading about a third of the article and thinking "geez, there's a Linux Telephony web site."
D'oh!
www.christopherlewis.com
In the telecom industry availability, uptime, cost per port, support, and time to market are everything. Hardware costs are usually flat as you will cut a deal with intel(dialogic), nms, aculab, or one of the other guys.
The software and os should be tested to meet these requirements. At this point linux shines very well. Many of the older installations are either windows,solaris, or sco. Quite a few are going linux as they update to newer hardware and ASR. Most ASR venders support linux (including speechworks and nuance). Licenses for ASR usually cost the same on windows and unix/linux.
This leaves os as the main area to cut costs (assuming inhouse implementations). As more ivr's move to VXML from proprietary platforms (periphonics(nortel),ediphy, etc) linux scales even better. The cost of a new server becomes ASR licenses + Hardware. Here linux really shines.
A caller will not know if they are on linux, os2, windows, etc. It is about cost and availability.
With RH you can just customize a kickstart (list of rpms) file and be done with it.
-> 10 min customized install, amazingly easy to setup
Howdy,
I worked for a telcom firm in Sweden and we used the solutions from www.teligent.co.uk to handle refills on phone cards (and a few other services). Parts of their solution were based on FreeBSD. But they used SCO/unix as phoneline-handler as there were only drivers for the card in SCO. Even though this might have changed as I write this. (I know they were trying to get away from SCO and getting everything over to FreeBSD when I was working with it.)
As an enterprise architect for a very large US bank, I understand your concerns. However, I think it may be time for you to re-evaluate your position. Many big Wall Street trading houses are migrating their core mission critical trading applications from Unix to Linux. Some of them are quoting some truly outrageous savings in the process. When you get traders willing to move those kinds of apps to OSes based upon the Linux kernel, you have to realize that it is possible to buy the kind of support contract that you're looking for.
BTW, have you explored the Linux support offerings from Sun, IBM, and Compaq/HP lately? You might be pleasantly surprised.
Dialogic is one of the biggest playersin the field, and they were VERY late with their Linux drivers. On top of that, the first releases were not quite up to par, both on stability and features.
Another thing to mention is the lack of a VisualBasic/COM equivalent on Linux. By equivalent I mean a quick and dirty RAD environment with thousands of programmers that use it. There are many companies which produce ActiveX/COM solutions which really make development with the dialogic APIs a breeze. There is no such equivalent in the Linux side. It's C/C++ or the highway. This limits the number of programmers out there who can get on board developing on the Linux platform.
If you don't think this is important, think about how many companies are shelling outbetween $200 and $400 per PORT in licensing fees for these products (COM/ActiveX)! The Dialogic APIs (and I would thing other manufacture's are similar) are not for the average programmer.
There is also something to be said about Windows NT and 2000: if you use it as a dedicated server, with a clean install, it's a pretty stable platform (I have to admit it...). The real problem (and bad reputation) that windows has is with desktop machines that are being toyed with by users or lame sysadmins. A windows machine used as a telephony server wouldn't even need to be patched with every security release out there, since it would be a dedicated machine with the minimum amount of services installed, and no WEB, FTP, etc.
There is also something to be said about the ease with which GUI administrative front ends can be rolled out in Windows using VB.
This being said, I still believe that Linux SHOULD/COULD be natural the platform of choice given the stability / price it brings into the equation. I think the platform is on a steady path of improvement, whlie windows steadily tries to wring more money out of everyone's pocket. There has to be a turnover point, and it can't be far away...
Guillermo
How many extensions can you put on a PC based system? WHat kind of cost would a normal install be?
The reason I ask is we have two building with Avaya equipment in them. The main building has about 200 extensions and the other 100. We do all the usual stuff like automated attendant, voice mail, transfer, etc. What would it cost to replicate this system with a linux based phone system. Could we use the existing handsets (some analog, some digital)?
Jeff
LynxOS. We're working on porting a VOIP switch from VxWorks to LynxOS right now.
I've been developing telephony apps for years and have been closely following Linux support. The major problem has been vendor support for Linux drivers and the general "proprietaryness" of the telephony industry. Up until about two years ago there were no drivers for the telephony hardware.
It's really unfortunate since NT4 was the major platform and was barely usable because of the 100% uptime requirement. I have no idea how many times I've had "bosses" breathing down my neck because the company was completely dependent on a NT4 based telephony PBx which flaked out every 6 weeks.
Anyways, there are a few solutions like Bayonne out there but mostly you have to write to a C API. Problem is major porting issues and learning new API's
JTAPI may be the answer but the support is fairly recent. Dialogic (Intel) now supports JTAPI but only on Intel. 8 by 8 (Netergy) has ported their IDE/server to Linux but it is quite young and depends on the Cisco 4300 gateway (== $$$$)
Ditto
Here it is,
http://www.itweek.co.uk/Products/Hardware/11345
bye.