Home > IT Answers > VoIP > Videoconferencing
Maryam82
100 pts.
0
Q:
Videoconferencing
VoIP, MPLS, Network connectivity, VoIP case studies, videoconferencing
what is the best way to deploy videoconferencing services? An Internet solution over fiber with a 5 MB bandwidth, Satellite connection or over a data network (MPLS)? but the last is an expensive solution. and videoconferencing services are used for meetings and interview which rarley occur of daily basis.
ASKED: Nov 18 2007  4:46 AM GMT
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
RELATED QUESTIONS
0
JohnyAdmin
305 pts.
0
A:
 RATE THIS ANSWER
0
Click to Vote:
  •   0
  •  0
  • AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Video conferencing can be highly intensive bandwidth wise. We also do not use it regularly but need it in place when we need it. We have a 100mbps line with burstable options up to 500mbps. It is an Ethernet hand off. This was the most cost efficient way of doing this. We pay a little more when we need it but it is always there and ready to go.
Last Answered: Nov 19 2007  3:10 PM GMT by JohnyAdmin   305 pts.
  •   
0
0
RSS - Discussions Help
Discuss This Answer:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _



_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Shoey   40 pts.  |   Nov 19 2007  8:33PM GMT

Most Video Conferencing solutions allow you to throttle the bandwidth to as low as 256K. I know this is true for most Tandberg and LifeSize VC solutions.

Best Regards,

 

Papp   310 pts.  |   Dec 2 2007  4:34PM GMT

Intense, not really. FIFO, doubled-up, even tripled-up is still troublesome keeping statefull in a stateless world. Buffers on either end of every point of failure or over-booking can get expensive as distance increases. First what resolutions are expected? Seems to me to save costs, you would choose higher resolutions for intra-country toplogies and leaner ones for inter-country-continent collaberations. The biggest question on the ethernet solution is keeping stateful connects reliable in a stateless world evolving intp IPv6 and deteriorating political adgendas would introduce another factor of outta sync and delays. MPLS supported proprietary transport with a carrier agreement on bandwidth is rapidly getting priced beyond reach. So I guess with Ethernet you would have to over-book like mad, have buffer pools on each hop, or just expect not to use it if lets say another 911 news worthy event transpires. So either lowering your expectations is the rational solution unless you have unlimeted funds. Of course you could prove Bell’s Inequalities wrong and have all the bandwidth you would ever need.

 

Snapper70   510 pts.  |   Jan 8 2008  9:43PM GMT

You haven’t indicated your expectations - are you looking to have one inside connection to another site, simple point-to-point, or are you looking to have multiple participants in a meeting? Is there already a connection in place on an Ethernet network?

2 units could talk over 2 ISDN lines at each location, which MIGHT be the least expensive, and allows you to then connect with 3rd parties and no security issues.. cost would be the appropriate ISDN module at each end, 2 ISDN lines at each location, and the cost of the calls when used.

If you HAVE Ethernet with spare capacity between the locations already, you can ride on that, but you’ll wind up using a fixed amount of bandwidth when the call is taking place - 384k, for instance. If you frequently run at capacity (or run across the Internet for that connectivity) you will probably experience problems.

 
0