New trunk management software helps VoIP equipment makers develop products with standards-compliant, physical-layer interfaces.
NComm Inc. has launched trunk management software that will enable voice over IP (VoIP) equipment manufacturers to develop products with standards-compliant T1/E1, T3/E3, SONET/SDH and SONET APS physical-layer interfaces.
TMS-VoIP software package includes both source code and a turnkey application featuring performance monitoring, line testing, packet transmission and signaling functions for carrier-ready VoIP WAN communications. The software helps to solve much of the complexity involved in providing physical layer access for VoIP traffic across multiple carriers and technologies.
According to NComm vice president of marketing John Brandte, TMS-VoIP will allow vendors whose strength is voice communications rather than networking to speed VoIP products to market. "VoIP gateway manufacturers generally have stronger data experience than wide-area voice expertise, and they want to continue to focus on their core competencies, not necessarily undertake complex development with unfamiliar technology," he said in a statement. "NComm TMS-VoIP removes the uncertainty and delivers robust, standards-based solutions while significantly reducing the time, cost and risk associated with developing these interfaces in-house."
Indeed, VoIP gateway vendor Antek Networks Inc. has already announced that it will use NComm's TMS-VoIP along with a Maxim-Dallas single chip transceiver to build the physical layer WAN interface for forthcoming VoIP products.
2014 Next-Gen WAN SurveyWhile 68% say demand for WAN bandwidth will increase, just 15% are in the process of bringing new services or more capacity online now. For 26%, cost is the problem. Enter vendors from Aryaka to Cisco to Pertino, all looking to use cloud to transform how IT delivers wide-area connectivity.
The UC Infrastructure TrapWorries about subpar networks tanking unified communications programs could be valid: Thirty-one percent of respondents have rolled capabilities out to less than 10% of users vs. 21% delivering UC to 76% or more. Is low uptake a result of strained infrastructures delivering poor performance?