Slashdot Mirror
Cisco VoIP Ditched for Open-Source Asterisk
An anonymous reader writes "Sam Houston State University (SHSU) is moving 6,000 users off a Cisco VoIP platform to an open-source VoIP network based on Asterisk. One big driver, of course, is cost. From the article: 'We thought that it will be more cost effective in the long run to go with an open source solution, because of the massive amounts of licensing fees required to keep the Cisco CallManager network up and running,' says Aaron Daniel, senior voice analyst at SHSU."
I've just released FreePBX 2.1.2, which is a major security upgrade from 2.1.1. Not really relevant to this article, except that they both deal with Asterisk.
(For those that don't know, FreePBX is the only open source GUI for configuration and management of Asterisk. www.freepbx.org)
--RobSchlock Mercenary.
Seems like the majority of Asterisk support has been for SIP phones. Some support for SCCP phones such as the 7910. Be nice if more low end phone support was available. Overall, Asterisk seems much nice than CCM and does not rely on a OS/Application installation.
I consult for a small Asterisk host, Lylix.net, and our customers couldn't be happier. It's a bitch to configure (hence we can charge $$$ for the service) but I'll be damned if it isn't a solid piece of FOSS, much like Apache. My hats are off to the Asterisk guys, it's likely to become one of the most important FOSS projects in the next 5 years or so.
From the article:
"While Asterisk and the SIP protocol lack some of the more extensive features on the Cisco CallManager..."
This may be true for vanilla Asterisk, but there is an extensive community adding a wide range of additional features and services to Asterisk. For example, <plug>our Enswitch product</plug> provides a layer of billing and commercial services on top of Asterisk and SIP Express Router. Having work extensively with both Asterisk and CCM, I would claim that with Asterisk plus all the applications that work with it already surpasses the features of CCM, and Asterisk has the momentum behind it. Over the next few years, CCM will fall further behind, and before long Asterisk will be the dominant telephony platform in the same way Apache is the dominant web server platform now.
"The Asterisk functions are spread across six redundant Dell servers"
- solaris.htm
How is it that you can save thousands on Cisco licensing, and yet still see the need to try and save more by buying crappy Dell hardware.
Are they at least running Solaris 10, which can improve performance?
http://www.thrallingpenguin.com/articles/asterisk
My company sells Asterisk solutions to business clients and we're very happy with it. Once you figure out what you're doing the sky is the limit when it comes to configuration. My only issue with Asterisk is the voicemail subsystem. If Digium would put some time into that I would be the happiest person alive. Tom
This is not an attempt to troll or anything. But this doesn't seem like to me as a major blow to Cisco. Universities and Corporate and Government user are a much larger sectors at large compared to universities. And dont tell the College recruiters this the rest of the world doesn't follow what universities do. for the following reasons.
Universities have cheap skilled labor. A slew of talented kids/young adults who are willing towork for free or near minimum wage, but when they leave to the real world they will be demanding $35,000 and up a year for the same job. This is the reason why many Open Source projects work and save money in Universities but when a Corporation gets it, it becomes a money pot. Because for a company it is cheaper to call Cisco and pay them $1000 for a fix to their problems then having a team of 10 people at your company taking a day to fix the problem because they do not have the answer sitting right in front of them or able to contact the engineer who created it. vs. a University where this 10 people 8 bucks an hour are much cheaper then calling Cisco for help.
Universities are allowed to experiment almost by charter. If something goes wrong this screw all the people who are not getting phone service. You will have wait until we fix the problem, it is not like we are loosing money with the phones down for a couple of hours. Private companies loose money when their communication are done so they want Cisco to come and fix it right away and they better know what they are doing. Being an Education facility it is allowed to experiment in different products while Companies find better value in using what they know works.
Liberal University vs. Conservative Corporations, basically means if it not exactly what we want we keep on trying and trying until we get it right (perhaps making it worse in the process) or If it does what we need we hold on to it until we find the perfect solution (which guarantees that they are going to use a product they don't like for a long time)
This is why Open Source is popular in Universities but in Corporate and government use they need to work a little harder to get acceptance.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I work for a SIP hardware provider. We have a whole department dedicated to interoperability testing with other vendors of SIP infrastructure and user agents. Asterisk is approximately the least SIP compliant bit of software out there. It's great if all you want to do is basic calls but the reason why it's perceived as working so well is because vendors (like us) have to hack our software to work with it because our customers demand it, even if it makes us non-RFC compliant. Why has Asterisk never shown up at a Sipit bakeoff despite having been repeatedly invited? Asterisk has unfortunate momentum.
I mean, before bashing on other people, they might just have looked at their own site.. The page contains 160 images (is that really neccesary?)), When I hit back I got a "malformed URL" message, and frankly, it's just an ugly and awkward site IMO.
"It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
OK I give up why is SCCP called "Skinny" instead of "Skippy"?
My friend at my last job wrote his own VOIP software and he told me it wasn't very hard. If I had my own voip system, all I'd be doing would be making calls to my friends from the White House, Pentagon, or other famous places for fun.
God spoke to me.
Or, more puzzlingly (that a word?), how do some companies get away with competing against FOSS products with highly expensive proprietary offerings? I'm assuming that the proprietary solution has the same functionality as the other; maybe some bells and whistles on the fringes, but essentially the same.
They must make their money from licencing fees (and maintenance, but FOSS can do that, too). So why don't customers choose the cheaper option. Don't get me wrong; while I approve of FOSS and use it whenever I can, I won't hestitate to buy a proprietary product if it does what I need and there isn't a viable FOSS alternative.
I'm no expert in this - which is why I'm puzzled. Can anyone tell me (us) why? Is it any combination of the following?
1. "Noone was ever fired for buying IBM" (MS/Cisco/etc).
2. The bells and whistles are what the buyer craves.
3. Proprietary products have better support.
4. It's free, so it can't be worth anything.
5. What's FOSS?
6. We only run Windows (Solaris, whatever).
7. Proprietary products are better "rounded" or "easier to use".
I know that all these have flaws and, sometimes the reason is valid. But overall, I think my question still stands.
BTW. If anyone can think of anything to add to the list - I'd love to hear it.
I've used asterisk quite a bit and it works quite well. Also Sipx PBX is another good performer, although slightly harder to set up, easeier to configure. Sipx PBX is another open source solution that can be found over at the Sip Foundry. They have some good testing code that comes in handy when troubleshooting sip to sip issues. cluge
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
You know, I'd hate to be labelled the Grammar Police, but I stopped reading the above post as soon as I hit this gem: "and required little to know intervention." Or should that be "You no, I'd hate to be..."
The people who learn their chops in university are hired by major corporations. The major corps then have the talent they need to implement and maintain something like Asterisk. So, maybe the universities aren't that important in the short term but in the long term they sure are.
I hope they have some other Asterix or at least linux junkies in their grad programs when he takes off. Otherwise, he's given them lower cost over the short term only.
How the hell does the length of a post affect an individual's grammer? "Know" for "no" is a truly boneheaded error, much more so than "then" for "than". I never fault the sometimes ridiculous spelling/grammer of posts from English-as-a-2nd/3rd/4th-language folks, but you can usually spot one of those when you're reading it. This one doesn't have that feel. The quality of spelling/grammer/communication in the US sucks; the only reason things keep working is that English is such a contextual language you can relay huge amounts of meaning with next to no (correct) words. This is probably also why email loses in efficiency much of what it gains in speed, it's hard to convey the context (which might be carrying a non-trivial percentage of the message's information.) But hell, don't listen to me. I write with a '57 Pelikan 140 and only yesterday got a cellphone (so I'd be able to get the call that every parent fears.)
I know everyone hypes Asterisk and Open Source and all that.
But has anyone looked at Asterisk close enough? It's the most horrid piece of software I have seen in a long time. Its configuration is awkward at best and downright inconsistent and nonsensical at worst.
Its documentation is practially non-existent. Nowhere do you find a good documentation written by the programmers. All you have are Wikis and web sites where people try and guess how Asterisk works. Howtos consist of config snippets without explaining what the options mean, let alone explaining the grand scheme behind everything.
Maybe it works after you configured it based on some other guy's experience, but if you want clean and well-documented software, go look elsewhere.
Asterisk seems to be the PHP or MySQL of the PBX world.
</rant>
Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
Check out FreeSWITCH its much better. http://www.freeswich.org/
It has more work to go but its on the road to whip Asterisk.
There is some irony to this story - the expensive part of any phone system is (hold your breath) the phones. I will point out that the SHSU could pick an open standard protocol and move the phones from one system to another. Try that with Microsoft Office Communicator some time - you can't. I noticed that this story is under the Linux category and - I will point out that Cisco Call Manager 5.0 runs on linux and can run SIP to phones (as well as many other protocols).
Now, I know Asterix fairly well, Cisco fairly well, open source VoIP fairly well (as the joke goes I wrote the O'Reilly book), and SIP really really well. As was pointed out in Mark Spencer's Keynote at VON last week, the SIP stack in Asterix certainly has some room for improvement. And given SHSU does not seem to have any intention to support the development of Asterix by buying a support contract from Digium, I sure hope they are doing something to make sure that Asterix get the support that they will need it to have to stay relevant.
I work for a Fonality PBXtra reseller and the pbx absolutely rules. Asterisk on linux is the future of PBXs. The menu system, reporting, call queues and gui absolutely kill traditional phone systems. BTW, Vonage runs on Asterisk and so does broadvoice and other VOIP companies.
Contrary to popular belief, Unix is user friendly. It just happens to be particular about who it makes friends with.
At my work we have Asterisk PBX/VoIP and its still way too raw to use. Unending list of problems and bugs, things work differently with new releases and it is not that stable or efficient under heavy loads. We end up having to purchase very beefy hardware and hire a guy whoes job it to monitor/fix it 24/7.
Just try to get a price for buying a plain old VoIP speakerphone.
You can't. You have to go via one of their vendors, who are required to sell you some crappy VoIP service. The excuse is that you get the full Polycomm experience this way. Yeah, I sure do!
The "small room" phone I bought a few years ago, the only analog one I found for sale in a store, suffers from terrible echo problems. I'm just about certain that there is a "suck really bad" setting in the firmware that Polycomm sets if you don't pay at least $500 or more.
The company must be run by asshole marketing executives. Please, don't help them stay in business. Let the fuckers die.
"too raw to use. Unending list of problems and bugs .. not that stable .. purchase very beefy hardware and hire a guy whoes job it to monitor/fix it 24/7."
was Re:I'd say its a huge mistake
davecb5620@gmail.com
Management is usually ill-informed and tends to approve money spent on name-brand products that are purchased through familiar sales cycles from established VARs. They're getting "something" for their money. Projects involving FOSS tend to have money spent and labor expended, but in a way that feels unfamiliar to management and on products they're likely very unfamiliar with.
Labor flexibility is two-pronged. Proprietary products can be faster to implement than FOSS solutions since the vendors usually sell installation (whole or support) as well. This enables full-time staff to keep doing their jobs without hitting a huge learning curve for a new system. FOSS solutions can have some of this, too, but often don't, requiring a lot of experimentation, testing, and dealing with the learning curve, taking time today's "lean" staffs don't have.
The other side of labor flexibility is that the labor marketplace tends to be filled with people used to the proprietary product sales/install cycle and experienced in its operation. Skilled open source people are harder to find, harder to replace, and tend to be able to demand higher salaries.
"the expensive part of any phone system is (hold your breath) the phones" - cullenfluffyjennings
.. is secretarial functions .. To fix this, Daniel is looking into extensions to the SIP protocol"
"We thought that it will be more cost effective in the long run to go with an open source solution, because of the massive amounts of licensing fees required"
"And given SHSU does not seem to have any intention to support the development of Asterix by buying a support contract from Digium, I sure hope they are doing something to make sure that Asterix get the support that they will need it to have to stay relevant." - cullenfluffyjennings
The article actually doesn't mention a support contract. Daniel actually talks about adding to Asterix and engaging with the online community. Given that the drive for the project was is cost and since the SHSU can handle its own support it wouldn make sense if you can handle your own support issues. Senior voice analyst Aaron Daniel, did have this to say in relation to adding new features to Asterix:
"The only major feature missing
He also mentions getting (and contributing I assume) support from the online community and support from Digum for the T-1 cards
. "Daniel says he has so far been able to keep up with support issues through mailing lists and the online community that develops and supports Asterisk. Dell provides support on the server hardware, and Digium supports the T-1 cards installed in the boxes."
"Daniel has also created copious documentation on all the Asterisk configurations and changes he's made to the software. "Basically if someone were to have to come in and take over my job, they'd have a pretty quick turnaround on learning what needs to be done," he says."
I'm sure such documentation would be usefull to the support forums that would be doing something Asterix needs to stay relevant.
was Freeloaders or open source pioneers ?
davecb5620@gmail.com
I just deployed an Asterisk phone system powering ~140 wired Polycom phones and ~70 wireless phones covering 31 acres. Here are some tips from what I learned in this process:
.), getting the users to think about the dial plan and having them understand their satisfaction with the results is directly related to trying to get it right. When we distributed the phones to each desk, the boxes were labeled and sorted on the pallet this helped save a huge amount of time and allowed us to have the furniture installers help setup phones if we wanted too. Staging the phones: pre-configuring them, having the boxes labeled and sorted on the pallet was well worth doing. The wireless phones we signed out to the employees with some other stuff like work shirts. Having the right vendor to walk us through the process was critical.
1. Pick a capable vendor for each job you outsource. I looked at Asterisk and decided it is too technical for a Asterisk newbie to build a production system, so I called Digium and they referred me to a dCAP certified Asterisk consultant in my area. Knowing Asterisk is one thing, but knowing how to pull off a great install is more than that. Our vendor developed a workbook that covers many parts of a successful deployment, such as reviewing the network (gear, configs, wiring plant), getting the users (names, current extentions, locations .
2. Pilot your install before you deploy it. The environment I was choosing Asterisk for is an automall. Phones are a big part of the business (as with many) and setting expectations is important. We formed a phone users group to have them decide how we wanted to route calls (dial plan), the idea was to get them involved because it is really theirs to use. Some departments were easy and some were not. Sales was essentially create a call groups for the differnt brands we sell and have the operators transfer them to the appropriate group. Service was much more complicated, but having live operators helps a ton. Parts was easy as well, but all of that needs some serious consideration. Knowing you will get it wrong and tweaking it on the fly will happen, do it and move on.
3. We picked Polycom phones and that turned out to be a great choice, the 601's have six "programmable" buttons and great sound quality (handset and speakerphone). The Polycoms have a two port switch built-in and will trunk with the network switch which means the second port on the phone can be a differnt vlan than the phone. So we have them plugged in/wired like this: [network-switch]---[phone]---[computer]. The phones run Cisco CDP, when the switch detects the phone (via CDP) it assigns the phone as a trunk device and allows you to choose what vlan the phone will be on and what vlan the computer port on the phone will be on. Also you can have a differnet vlan if you were to plug the PC directly into the switch. The setup works well and I could go on and on about QoS, edge marking of traffic and PoE issues but I will stop.
4. The FOP (Flash Operator Panel) is a cool thing, but we had to do some customizing for our needs. We looked at Fonalitys HUD, but FOP works great. You can see which phones are ringing, have voice mail (whether it is new or old), transfer calls by drag and drop, monitor the inbound queues and really not have to touch the phone to work the system as an operator. Nicholas, the guy that wrote FOP is an invaluable resource. He was willing to help and has done a great job. I am asking our vendor and am going to make sure he gets paid in some way.
5. Wireless WiFi phones (OUCH): We chose the Hitachi IPC-5000 and Meru Networks for the AP's. Okay I was getting a little cutting edge here, but hey why not?! Lessons:
Meru Networks ROCKS!! They figured out the roaming WiFi thing for sure!
Hitachi IPC-5000's to be determined: it look like either the phones have a high failure rate or we have a bad batch or something. Also it looks like they aren't nearly as durable as say a cell phone/mobile phone (which is VER
Which distro does Linus use?
I am amused at stories like this because this is an example of corporate maneuvers coming back to bite them on the ass. Lots of small companies have been put out of business because software companies have given away products and services in an effort to get market share. Now, the open-source/freeware movement is doing the same thing to the corporations.
I work at a medium sized corporate in Australia and we have just had our Avaya 8300s / 700 system replaced for Asterisk for a few departments. Seems that the world was going toward SIP we planned to move to our Avaya System (H323 based) to SIP for IT & some new installs. In the end it was becoming too expensive and frustrating and as Asterisk was in our long term plan we made the move now as it was about equal in pain and obviously less cost.
The one thing I will say about Asterisk is that it *is* hard to configure in the end we needed help and got a good local consultancy company (ANX Solutions) to get the systems up and running. However, it is incredibly powerful.
I second the comments about the voice mail system that have been mentioned, its one of the only weak spots and most of our users found it a little odd and preferred the old Avaya system.
Getting off Cisco CM is just the first step into freedom.
The Cisco 7970G uses XML for its configs and customizable GUI (and HUI) connected to selectable features. Its startup screen has the Java logo. What OS is it running? How do I get it to download and run Java applets? How can I code, install and run native apps?
These little touchscreen phones should offer complete portable offices that even a PHB can use anywhere, without having to search for the "any key". Now that the server is open, how do we open the clients that run on the local HW?
--
make install -not war
Licensing fees are typically amazingly small compared to the overall cost that a company is spending on something. As a simple (and very common) example suppose you hire a secretary to work for your company for five years. Over the course of five years his/her salary alone will run up to 200k, who knows how much once other costs are added in. Most people(and more importantly most secretaries) generally think that MS Office is the best product for this person. If a worker you are potentially going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on is better off with MS Office then wouldnt it be stupid not to spring for a $200 dollar license? (i actually have no idea what office costs, but that sounds about right) You can come up with a similar example for most proprietary software. Licensing fees for things like server software may be higher, but the other costs associated with it are also high enough to dwarf those license fees. What drives purchasing decisions for software is differentation and the total cost of operating, licensing fees are (almost) always trivial compared to these things. It is so rare for people to switch to free software solely to avoid licensing fees that when it happens we see articles on slashdot about it.
Although initial licensing fees, cost of call manager software may be significant (CapEx or Capital Expenses), any large project boils down the OpEx (operational expenses) as these are the costs that can truly make or break a project. What does it cost to support a project over a long term?
Although many of these arguments have been stated against OSS for a long time they still apply here. Technically Asterisk may be just as good as Cisco, but there's an old addage for support "Having one neck to choke." What does this mean? If you have a Cisco LAN, IP core, WAN and telephony, if something breaks you go after ONE vendor. With the OSS telephony solution if the telephony solution breaks, either a) you take on the task of fixing it b) you try to get all your vendors to work together to fix it.
Lastly, professional services can play a large part in a corporations decision to go with a non-Cisco solution. Most large companies probably pay cisco to provide consultative services on their LAN/WAN/Content/optical and so being able to ask cisco "Is my current LAN infrastructure going to be impacted by this telephony change? Or how will VOIP be impacted by this MPLS modification?"
(note: I'm all for OSS, but for a business critical function like VOIP, I don't want to be dependent on the one or two asterisk guys on my staff not quitting. And if the system goes down, I want to be able to have cisco fly an army of engineers on site.
Back in the day, well before software was as complex and complicated as it is today, software was just stuff that came with the computers that were sold. Software itself wasn't the "product." But since Microsoft decided to expand their market beyond hardware makers to consumers and wrote that letter about software piracy, the world changed.
How is this relevant? Again, software is the product. In this case, Cisco and its licensing fees. Most people think of Cisco as a hardware product. While I know it's just a computer with software code that routes information around, it's still, in the minds of many, a hardware product that serves its purposes. But when you are talking about "license fees" you start to think of it differently... more like software. Cisco screwed itself, I think, by moving away from its perception as a reliable hardware product maker. Now you buy their hardware and license the software. It makes people want to shop around more and since the Asterisk product is OSS, well the choice starts to become one of how much money to spend.
It's unfortunate, but seems to be a potentially strong indication of what OSS is doing and why there is such resistance to it, where it comes from and what forms it takes. Looking at it from this perspective shows a nice angle to why software patents are such an important weapon in the software product world.
If you aren't willing to learn how to use a tool, that's OK - I'm not willing to learn how to fly a helicopter. If I need a helicopter flown, I will hire a qualified pilot and be happy that I saved time and money by not taking years of lessons. But I'm not going to go around claiming helicopters are bad because they aren't as easy to use as tricycles. Don't be such a whiner, go pay somebody who is willing to learn how to use FOSS and have them implement a solution for you.
when I was working for a major defense subcontractor, all the kingpins held large amounts of IBM stock. Thus, you were only allowed to buy IBM (I managed to buy DEC once, but only by doing extensive research and conclusively proving that I couldn't get the job done with IBM equipment).
Nowadays the hereditary CEO class holds Cisco stock.
One of the big boons about Asterisk is that you don't have to go through the (overly complex) Cisco ordering process. You get a few Dell servers, smack on Asterisk and away you go!
But... Since the dot-com crash, using the IT guys in any major (non-university) environment to make descisions has been a big no-no. Getting them to even consider a linux-based 'volunteer' PBX for something as critical as telephony when hundreds/thousands/millions of dollars depends on their voice comms is just not reality in my opinion. Call Manager has the Cisco brand behind it (no one is seriously going to question their brand) alongside services such as Cisco TAC and a single-point of contact to bitch and moan. Any financial/enterprise institution can see the benefit of these things and the massive disadvantage in effectively running their own PBX in-house.
While Asterisk is a great product and very interesting to play with (I'm running an Asterisk VoIP solution here), I think the pipe-dream of it cheerfully doing away all the proprietary PBX's is far from reality. Ask any bank.
Now there's one hoopy frood who really knows where his towel is!
Don't hold your breath.
I used to do quite a bit of stuff with Asterisk and I happen to run 7 production machines across a DS3 circuit each responsible for up to 4 T1 worth of traffic (92 calls in our current configuration of PRI with 1 DCHAN per span) I am somewhat skeptical about what the boxes would do if they really ran all 92 channels at once It think we have never had more than 2 of the T1's full on a given machine so it's a good thing we load balance them.
I decided I was not happy with this situation so I began work early this year on my own open source soft switch called
FreeSWITCH http://www.freeswitch.org/
imho, company A using open source will beat out company B using closed source. Why put your company at risk with high licensing fees?
Asterisk is a realy nice package, but not very stable, although it gets better with each release. As in, it "works", until suddenly... you get dropped calls. Or the incoming caller gets a high-pitched squeal into the phone instead of your PBX menu.
Of course, a lot of these issues have more to do with the zaptel drivers, rather than Asterisk itself. But trust me - you WANT to stay up to date with the Asterisk releases. Do not run anything below 1.2.X.
Shhh, you're giving away M$'s (as well as other company's) secrets! Hardware is linked to software, because you have to use software to run the hardware. Software is linked to, well, simple ideas. But ideas are freely available! So what's the best way to monopolize a market? Control the ideas, to control the software, to control the hardware, and control the WORLD, MWUHAHAHA!!! Ahem. So, yes, it's no surprise patent/copyright control is the main focus of many a monopoly, and so it's no surprise Cisco has done a lot with software developement. I'm sure Cisco is busy working on ways of trying to prevent FOSS from operating with it's phones right now!
Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.