vicidial and voip gateway at different location

[asterisk_at_my_risk]

hello

i am in india here bandwidth still a expensive thing to have currently my vicidial is working as follows
CASE A
agent---VoIP---voip gw---VICIDIAL ------VoIPTRUNK ------->SOFTSWITCH

in this all elements till vicidial are in india and only softswitch is in US

CASE B
if i shift my vicidial in US and put T1 trunks on it and agents are in india aceesing it thru voip gw which is also in INDIA


agent---voip gw-----VOIP SIP link-----VICIDIAL---T1--link--
------IN INDIA--- -----IN US--------

i want your suggestions on

1) i go for CASE B will i be able to have some significant savings in bandwdth ?

2)i go for CASE B quality of calling will imporve or will remain same ?

or which option is more suitable according to you for a 60 seat operation any other differences in both the cases which anyone like to bring to attention

[mflorell]

If your dialer is in the US and you are calling the US, you will be able to save on bandwidth over having your dialer in India. This means that only your agents are connected over VOIP through your internet connection, not all of the calls to customers. You should need 1/3 the bandwidth this way.

[asterisk_at_my_risk]

when a agent logs into dialer he is assigned a meetme room
as a session ID and he remains a memember of that and call are transfered to him by transfer app

now my question is if a agent is a member of meetmeroom already have a RTP connection established between India voip gw and US vicidial server
i was wondering this meetme connection between them must be consuming some bandwdth is that considerable ?

[mflorell]

The RTP connection to the meetme conference is just like any other phone call.

It will use bandwidth just as any other constantly-connected phone call.

I believe you could set silence-supression so that it would not use much bandwidth when no audio is being sent.

[aster1]

I am implementing ( and learning ) vicidial in a call center . If all ur agents are in same center (india ) then what you should do is have a asterisk server in ur center and send calls through that asterisk server to softswitch ... When doing this only ur calls require bandwith all web traffic will be on same lan and it will be very fast .. If you can get iax trunking to work then u can significantly save on call bandwith as well ..Considering that you will have atleast 150-200 ms latency from ur center in india to softswitch in usa ... Keeping most of vicidial and agent traffic is better i hope .This is what we do at our center in mumbai .


EDIT : I didnt read ur post properly before .. What you are doing right now is same as i wrote above ..I think ur current configuration is good enough considering that all elements till vicidial is in ur center ( india ) .. If you shift ur vicidial in US and make agents dial form india then you will waste even more bandwith on http traffic (between agent and vicidial ) . If you have agents at different locations in india then its worth a shot ..Even if you get a good connection in india u still have latency issue

[asterisk_at_my_risk]

hello matt
i was wondering if silences-suppresion is not available on my voipgw
than shall i assume the bandwidth saving will be 1/3 in case of vicidial in US ie case B

moreover although silence-suppression saves bandwidth it does make your voice quality slight low also

[asterisk_at_my_risk]

hello

well what if a agents logs in and he waits for a call in between the ideal time he start speaking something to other agent besides him with having his hanset on then also he is speaking that voice packets will again be transported to US location will consume bandwidth

well matt what is your take on the opinion of aster1 that keeping a server in US will rather increase bandwidth consuption in INDIA bec of http traffic and other traffic

well i am quite confused now on it please throw some light on this

[mflorell]

You can always use the MUTE key on the phone to not send audio, but really the bandwidth will be about 1/2 to 1/3 even with that audio and the web requests.

[asterisk_at_my_risk]

thats a interesting thing what i am thinking is that i will try that US option
and post the result on forum regarding bandwidth

and do you know any opensource bandwidth software more detailed than iftop because that can help be to realy compare both option and post the result on forum in more precise way

[mflorell]

I've used etherape for a more visual bandwidth monitoring, but it requires Xwindows to run. For commandline other than iftop, there are netstat, snort and tcpdump for more detailed report.