Reporting from the Trenches in the FoIP Wars

What is the key to FoIP success when using SIP trunking? First, you must have FoIP endpoints that really work. They must support both G.711 pass-through and T.38 FoIP. And, if they don’t have Commetrex’ Smart FoIP, you’re going to have to accept an up to five-percent failure rate regardless of what you do. But after that, it’s up to you to make sure your calls are being correctly handled. And, just because they are today, don’t count on them being effectively handled tomorrow. Below is an on-line chat between a very knowledgeable FoIP-based fax broadcaster and his very knowledgeable and helpful ITSP. It’s in reverse chronological order, so skip to the end and read back to here.

Time passes…

All done? What you’ve just read is the quick resolution of a problem with a specific route. This type of involvement is required today because the industry is in the midst of the transition from circuit-switched networks to IP networks, and you often have a mixture of the two. So the route your service provider and his carrier partners use to get to the endpoint terminal is all important.

So, if you want carrier-based FoIP to work for you, use fax endpoint products that work and use service providers that are experienced with FoIP willing to work with you.

On 3/9/2012 4:04 PM, Xxxxxx wrote:
> ## Reply above this line to update your ticket. ##
> Ticket #15085: Call placement errors.
> Please follow the link below link to review and
> update your request:
> http://xxxxxx.yyyyyy.com/tickets/15085
>
> ——————————————————-
>
> *John Smith, Mar 08 14:10 (MST):*
>
> Hey Fred,
>
> I’m able to complete the call over Big IP now. Can
> you try again?
>
> ——————————————————-
>
> *John Smith, Mar 08 13:55 (MST):*
>
> Hi Fred,
>
> I’ll need to look – I wasn’t pulling any BIG IP routes
> for this number which might mean that they don’t
> terminate to that area.
>
> ——————————————————-
>
> *Fred, Mar 08 13:02 (MST):*
>
> How is this resolved?
> Can you route via Big IP?
> They seem to be the best.
>
> ——————————————————-
>
> *John Smith, Mar 08 12:07 (MST):*
>
> Fred,
>
> Looks like Legacy Bell is our only route for this number.
> It’ll complete some of the time – we’re trying to
> increase capacity with them, though. Some of the
> rejects are simply due to capacity.
>
> ——————————————————-
>
> *John Smith, Mar 08 11:50 (MST):*
>
> Fred,
>
> Wasn’t T.38 in this case – Legacy Bell, actually. Still
> trying to see if this was/is the only available
> vendor for this area.
>
> ——————————————————-
> *Fred, Mar 08 09:53 (MST):*
>
> On 3/8/2012 9:53 AM, John Smith wrote:\
>
> One vendor is fine as long as it is Big IP.
> They seem to be the only reliable T.38 vendor.
>
> ——————————————————-
> *John Smith, Mar 08 08:53 (MST):*
>
> Hi Fred,
>
> Sorry for the delay – getting a new environment up
> and running and just got Wireshark installed. I see
> all the calls reaching the same vendor, but it
> appears we only have one route available for the call
> on the T.38 deck. I’m trying to confirm this, since
> the number is near Atlanta I would assume we have
> more routes. I’ll update you shortly.
>
>.——————————————————-
> *Fred, Mar 07 13:20 (MST):*
>
> The Xxxxxx system seems not to be able to accept and
> place calls. see attached PCAP file
>
> –
> Fred
>

Leave a Comment