By Sharla Sikes

We just looked into some of the VoIP analysis tools that are available based on Network World’s comparison.

But how’d they come up with their results?

Putting each system through the technological equivalent of a wringer, Network World subjected each tool to environments it may not ever see in real life.

The two-month test used a test bed composed of four IP PBX systems. The systems were EADS Telecom’s Nexspan L system, which uses a proprietary, stimulus-based VoIP call-control protocol;  Mitel Networks’ SX-200 ICP, which uses a proprietary message-based protocol called MINET for call control; NEC’s Univerge 7000, which uses both a proprietary stimulus-based call-control protocol called PROTIMS and also supports Session Initiation Protocol-based endpoints via a separate SIP controller; and PingTel’s SIPxchange, which is based fully and exclusively on standard SIP VoIP call control.

Network World designed the test bed with two subnets to represent a main and branch location, connected with Cisco routers and Extreme Networks switches. A PacketStorm Communications Hurricane IP Network Emulator was used to simulate a WAN connection, which allowed Network World to insert things like latency, jitter and packet loss into the test. More on the test bed is here.

Such intensive testing is a valuable resource for the VoIP industry, and a boon for network administration professionals. While it shouldn’t be taken as the Gospel truth, I am more impressed in Network World’s testing process than I am, say, Consumer Reports’ rating system for cars and trucks. When I see their ratings, I usually end up shaking my head in disgust.

Related Content

Subscribe to the post comments feeds or Leave a trackback