| Author |
dialer pool vs. dialer rotary-group
|
|
| MadChef 2001-04-28, 3:40 pm |
| I'm trying to digest the difference between using a dialer pool and a dialer rotary-group.
A rotary group will allow me to assign multiple physical interfaces to one or more logical interface, right?
I dialer pool will allow me to assign multiple physical interfaces to one or more logical interfaces as well.
The only significant difference I can think of is that when using dialer pools a physical interface can be part of multiple dialer pools and can do other fancy things like give priority and such.
Is the dialer pool concept just an enhancement of the rotary group or am I missing something?
MadChef | |
| SpeakEasy 2001-04-29, 12:00 am |
| Yup, pretty much...the way they've mentioned it in the Remote Guide is as follows:
"The use of dialer profiles versus rotary groups comes down to one question: “How much control
do I want to have over the link?” With dialer profiles, a map class can be created and applied
on a per destination basis. This allows a great degree of control over the characteristics of a
particular call based on the destination being called. Rotary groups do not make use of the map
class featureset. Therefore, they are limited to the characteristics applied to the dialer interface." (ref. p. 161 by Brain Morgan et al)
In the end the dialer pool falls into the interface dialer which falls into the Dialer profile which sits next to a rotary group.
HTH.... | |
| Dillon 2001-04-29, 12:16 pm |
| From what I can gather as well the old legacy DDR (rotary-groups) is totally incompatible with the newer idea of dialer profiles.
We are currently using a single dialer interface on each of our PRI ISDN's with 30 dialer map entries on each but want to put each individual connection on it's own dialer interface for more control of authentication etc. Unfortunately it seems that we cannot migrate to seperate dialers gradually & will have to reconfigure our routers in one go!
Dillon  |
|
|
|