bandwith usage rumours

[eliasferreyra]

hello

so many people says that vicidial uses too much bandwith to work
and they preffer another dialer like gnudialer etc..

the questio is---


can vicidial reduce the bandwith uses while its working?
i think using less process while asterisk is dialing must be good for that

[mflorell]

Really? I hadn't heard that. Can you point to some postings somewhere?

The audio side doesn't use any more bandwidth, but I can see how the web side might use slightly more, although not significantly.

[enjay]

In terms of VOIP bandwidth, yes it does dial alot and it dials fast.. I guess thats what makes it good right? no? yes? is that bad? HAHA!

[eliasferreyra]

xcuseme matt and enjay

o only made a comment
that sanz did on the gnudialer forum
jenifer sanz

i know that vicidial its the best dialer more than gnudialer

[aster1]

Well its not proper to say that vicidial is best or gnudialer is bad , both are gpl and there is no competition between them. However , saying that vicidial uses more bandwith than GNUdial might be too much . For voip both uses asterisk so i don't see how gnudial can use less bandwith for making calls . As for web traffic, why do you even need to count that if server and agents are in a lan environment ? As for vicidial making lot of calls, i think its a stupid statement since you can completely control dial levels .

[Op3r]

The bandwitdh factor really depends if you are using ulaw or alaw on a leased line going to your voip provider. Even plain asterisk is a bandwitdh hog if they are not using compression.

VICIDIAL bandwitdh usage is actually non issue. Its the load usage that it is an issue.

Apple and oranges

[mcargile]

Could you please post the link to the GnuDialer forum page where this was brought up. I am having a hard time finding anything about this.

For the web interface Vicidial actually uses very little bandwidth, though it does send out a bunch of packets. For dialing it is all dependent on how Asterisk is configured. I really do not see how this is an issue.

[enjay]

Well its not proper to say that vicidial is best or gnudialer is bad , both are gpl and there is no competition between them. However , saying that vicidial uses more bandwith than GNUdial might be too much . For voip both uses asterisk so i don't see how gnudial can use less bandwith for making calls . As for web traffic, why do you even need to count that if server and agents are in a lan environment ? As for vicidial making lot of calls, i think its a stupid statement since you can completely control dial levels .

Stupid is a strong word.. Of course you can control dial level. Was "attempting" to find some amusement in the statement, while flaunting the capabilities of vici.

Thanks,
Art

[aster1]

Ahh that was really not meant towards you enjay sorry if it did sound that way . I was pointing towards the person who made the post in gnudial forum if he/she meant that vici uses too much bandwith due to excessive dialing .

[eliasferreyra]

her name is jennyfer sanz

[TroyD]

I currently have a small callcenter that we are building to scale into a larger callcenter, I think if bandwidth is an issue due to load, I wouldnt dare use just one box (unless my budget dictated this). I have 3 boxes currently set up; 1 for MySQL, 1 for HTTP, and 1 for Asterisk/Vici. The only load that is on the vicidial box is the actual calls themselves, no http or any other service )other than my occational ssh session. I think that this is the way to go if you are concerned about additional bandwidth for ancillary services.. Just my 2 cents worth anyway.. Also using VLANS are a good way to seperate IP phone traffic from normal IP traffic. (Ideally it would be great to have all of the phones on their own network, but might not be an option for smaller budgets)

(I just realized that the previous poster was more than likely referring to bandwidth used by a SIP or IAX provider for actually making the calls. In this case scaling wont make a difference, but I get a T1 from a local provider at 174/month + calls (the way they bill is better, no minimum charges, and 3 seconds gets billed for 3 seconds not one minute) This will be a nice solution and more reliable than SIP/IAX and would get rid of the bandwidth issue as well..

[eliasferreyra]

what company is that did provideit for you?

and xplainme more about please TroyD

[TroyD]

what company is that did provideit for you?

and xplainme more about please TroyD

The environment was set up by myself, and is currently using V2.0.3 running on debian for all 3 servers, 2 of which are running in VMware ESX server (The WWW and MYSQL Servers)

The dialer dials our leads and currently I am using a web page I had to create that simply collects the query string from Vicidial Web Client Popup and then redirects it to a url that contains the GUID of the Lead and shows the DetailView in SugarCRM 5.0 so that the reps can edit client information. Its pretty basic at this time, however our client data is in SQL 2005 and we will be creating an interface that will cross update lead statuses between databases. (or something like that). We will be changing the dialer screen lables for a few fields, but so far thats pretty much it.

We will be moving away from sugarCRM though due to the large amount if issues and bugs. (mass update broken, search for nulls impossible, and on... and on...)

The Zaptel Interface is the X120P Digium Interface for T1 and the T1 is provided by Airespring.