| Matt Slaga \(US\) 2007-11-05, 1:12 pm |
| The only benefit you may gain is if the ISP happens to be the same as
the corporate office ISP and they offer some type of SLA on QoS. The
871 could appropriately mark the traffic to ISP required settings.
Otherwise, you are increasing overhead on the voice traffic. Based
solely on voice quality and not on end-user computer needs, I would pick
PhoneProxy over a VPN tunnel anyday.
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Robert
Kulagowski
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 10:57 AM
To: Louis Marascio (lmarasci)
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] cisco Unified PhoneProxy+7970 vs. 871
route+7970 r vs. cisco VPN Client+IP Communicator
> Is it any more "efficient", packet-wise or whatever, than a full-blown
> VPN tunnel configuration that you'd get with a 871?
Thanks for the information on the encryption. How about the above? I'm
just trying to determine whether there would be anything gained and if
it's possible that the user experience using the phone proxy vs. a full
VPN tunnel would be worthwhile.
I thought that reducing CPU on the laptop might be a plus, but if we're
encrypting voice packets then there's no gain there.
________________________________________
_______
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-----------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
from your computer. Thank you.
|