TechNO Expo

Scott Strand
Vice president, N’compass Solutions, Inc., Minneapolis

Most organizations have quite of bit a work to do to get the infrastructure ready to support IP telephony. The system architecture is more complex than traditional telephony, and organizations are often lacking the resources required to implement and support it.

In addition, IT organizations are too occupied with day to day operations to make IP telephony a priority, unless it is driven by senior management.

It is difficult to justify the cost of IP telephony, so un-less your organization can benefit from some specific applications, replacing a perfectly good PBX, just for the sake of converting to IP, doesn’t make sense.

IP telephony technologies have become the de facto standard. Most organizations would not consider purchasing a legacy PBX and loads of digital telephones. The gap is closing on legacy architecture and pure IP architecture, meaning all of the major telephony vendors’ architecture is becoming similar. Even nontraditional vendors, such as Microsoft and Google, are entering the market. The technology has become much more stable.

The manufacturers have an in-creased focus on trying to find the “killer apps.” Telephony has changed from a primarily hardware business, to a primarily software business—it’s all about selling applications and licenses now.

Companies typically underestimate the complexity of an IP telephony implementation. It requires a strong and dedicated project manager, and full support from senior management and the rest of the business. A typical project requires team members from all technology specialties: LAN, WAN, telecom, network security, server, database, e-mail, LDAP or active directory, and cable infrastructure.

Server-based telephony systems require the same type of upgrades and patches and security as any other server. This was not required in traditional telephony, so there is ongoing maintenance and defined processes required.

Business leaders have become more educated, but they often have misconceptions about which systems provide certain types of functionality. They may say “we need to implement VOIP,” because they want a presence application that integrates with their calendar. We need to be clear about what is meant by VOIP or IP telephony.

Even though more manufacturers are getting in the game, I don’t think companies will start migrating faster. I think it just provides more choices.