[SR-Users] Replacing an ACME Packet Net-Net SBC

[Jeff Brower]

Vladimir-

> Transcoding can be supported in software as well.

Not at high capacity, like 20,000+ AMR-WB calls in a 1U server.  My experience has been that high volume users of SBC
products are SWaP constrained -- especially limited space and power consumption.  Their end customers do not allow a
stacks of servers for voice/video transcoding, speech recognition, etc.

-Jeff

> As the maintainers of SEMS we fully agree with Carsten and Alex: the SBC
> module of SEMS is a good replacement of a typical SBC. If one also is
> looking for ease of usage, support, high availability and a powerful GUI
> then the answer is the ABC SBC which is based on SEMS and the SBC
> module. A free trial is provided under http://www.frafos.com/free-trial/
>
> The ABC SBC also enables easy configuration of LCR using provisioned
> tables and comes in an active-strandby configuration that enables
> failover without call interruption. Transcoding can be supported in
> software as well.
>
> Best Regards,
> -Vladimir
>
> On 27.2.2014 07:24, Melanie Pietersen wrote:
>> looking at this, is there some howto for setting up high-availability,
>> LCR and route-by-route transcoding?
>>
>> Melanie
>>
>> On 2/20/14 7:12 PM, Carsten Bock wrote:
>>> Hi Francesco,
>>>
>>> i would recommend, you look at the SEMS-project and it's SBC module.
>>>> From the functionality perspective, i don't think you'll miss anything
>>> compared to Acme Packet, latest trunk version even has a Registration
>>> cache, which works absolutely great...
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Carsten
>>>
>>> 2014-02-20 17:04 GMT+01:00 Francesco Maria Magnini <fmm1982 at gmail.com>:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to have some suggestions about a full replacement of an
>>>> ACME Packet Net-Net Session Border Controller.
>>>> By now, ACME SBC performs all the SBC functionalities, mainly:
>>>>
>>>> - it is used as a SIP endpoint for SIP client registrations
>>>> - it is used as a SIP endpoint for interconnection to multiple SIP
>>>> carriers via SIP trunks
>>>> - it is used for NAT traversal
>>>>
>>>> In this deployment, the SIP Server communicates only with the SBC
>>>> and this one takes care of the communication between the SIP Server
>>>> and the external SIP entities (UA clients, SIP Trunks).
>>>> In this scenario, can I consider to replace the SBC with Kamailio?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
>>>> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
>>>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
>> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>