Talk:ISDN

message: I explained the acronyms and added links to articles, but it might be useful for a more knowledgeable editor to weave in more definition. They are then later explained in "Configurations." Perhaps Configurations should appear before Perspectives? Describe the technology THEN describe reaction? I'll let someone else make that change, as it's late and I don't trust my judgment. ;) Cheers. Josh Powell 08:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BRI/PRI are introduced without definition in "Consumer and Industry Perspectives" 

message: I dont know if this is correct, but I believe a lot of radio stations used ISDN for studio to studio connections, such as interviews, panel discussions, guests, etc... as well as some times hosts working from home via ISDN connection to the studio.
--Weyoun6 07:52, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In the 1990s they did, where available, however these days they'd use far more convential internet systems, or occasionally private setups, or leased lines. --Kiand 00:43, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radio Stations 

message: Specifically IAD (Integrated Access Device's) may have ISDN BRI (S0) or ISDN PRI (E1/T1) interfaces – these IAD are used to front-end legacy equipment (PBX, IPBX), or supply PBX functionality towards the new voip standards (SIP/MGCP) that are now coming to the fore
The main reason for using Voip is cost – 
1.	An ADSL data link is effectively free - therefore you can have multiples of 30 (E1/T1) or 2 (BRI) voice channels connected for just the price of the ADSL/SHSL monthly connection fee.
2.	 Alternatively you can connect to your own LAN/WAN for no cost (might be an idea to let your network people know first though :})
The main reason for using an IAD is cost –
1.	You do not have to replace your existing equipment and therefore there is little impact for users (and no re-training).
2.	You can just use the IAD without a PBX (connect direct)
3.	You can use other VoIP products connected to the IAD (and restrict their use)
Note: PRI interfaces have normally been connected to SHDSL rather than ADSL - however with the recent innovation such as ADSL2+ and ADSL AnnexM - it is now entirely possible to provision an E1/T1 (depending on the codec used) on a single or bonded ADSL.
Note: The QoS (ATM and IP) of the incumbent network is a vital factor in the quality of the voice. (See articles on DiffServ). 
Note: There are also 'mixed' IAD as well - with POTS and ISDN interfaces - some IAD also have SIP Proxy servers enabled to connect up a network of VoIP (SIP) devices and either forward to other networks or just be a private network on its own.
Note: SIGTRAN IUA is also possible on some VoIP 217.207.193.222 (talk) 13:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  VoIP products: 

message: The article begins with,
*"Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN)"
and then goes on to explain,
*"The English term is a backronym that was thought to be better for English-language advertisements than the original, "Integriertes Sprach- und Datennetz" (German for "Integrated Speech and Data Net")."
::Why did you feel a desparate need to reproduce that here? 109.145.22.224 (talk) 13:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Backronym" 

message: "in Europe, India and Australia it is 30B+1D, with an aggregate bit rate of 2.048 Mbit/s (E1)"
In Brazil, too.  Zwargh 23:55, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brazil 

message: The sentence about Prof. Jaxin Hall of Sussex inventing ISDN in the late 1980's is not correct. I did not delete the sentence because this - by an IP Address - would probably be interpreted as vandalism. ISDN has already been tested before Jaxin Hall supposedly invented it. The problem is that many other web sites copy this incorrect information, but because it is referenced (you need an IEEE usbscription to read the article) no one dares to delete it. MM  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.61.255.87 (talk) 09:58, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have accessed the IEEE article from my University's network. There is no mentioning of a "Jaxin Hall" anywhere in the document. — 134.100.32.10 16:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The "Jaxin Hall" assertion was made by IP 146.171.254.66 on 20 September 2007 and has nothing to do with the IEEE article. I will remove the assertion. — 134.100.32.10 16:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jaxin Hall 

message: Don't you think this artical should directly relate to ISDN's speed right at the very beggining or near, sometime after the introduction.  And why not?  The reference to it as you scroll almost WAY down begins in something like "Because ISDN's speed is
only 128kbs," almost as if the article already informed you on the point; which I'm sure most readers looking up ISDN do it for history sake and really want to know it's speed right off.  Wikipedia is aimed at the leanient audience, so why be so unbecoming about it. ---------Bill Mclemore
: I slightly rewrote the intro to highlight that detail. DMahalko (talk) 05:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to say, ISDN is still very big here in Germany. However barely anyone is using it for internet access anymore as DSL is much faster and cheaper than dialup. But it is excellent for families or shared student flats as you get two voice channels and up to 10 phone numbers for only a few euros (2-4) more than analog. ISDN and ADSL on the same line is a very common configuration here. — 213.39.174.131 (talk) 10:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ISDN at 128 kbits per second

message: I am rather humored to see one of the positive aspects of ISDN being its support for videoconferencing. Has anyone writing about the positive features of ISDN ever even seen its videoconferencing in action? It is plainly just awful. Horribly low-resolution, low-framerate.. When videoconferencing is discussed in the context of ISDN they really mean "videoconferencing via a 320x200 pixel blurred, jumpy mess". Try to do anything serious with it, and it's more of a psychedelic artform that any sort of business conferencing system.  DMahalko (talk) 21:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends upon how many B-channels you use. Business users often use more than two. ISDN is an excellent system for constant bitrate services like videoconferencing. --213.39.186.137 (talk) 21:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISDN is touted for videoconferencing? Are you joking? 

message: How do I install ISDN ?–  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.168.230.46 (talk) 12:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISDN 

message: Hence I deleted the line:"In India, ISDN was very popular until the introduction of ADSL." There is no evidence, cited or otherwise, of this. 
Arunmehtain (talk) 11:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISDN was never popular in India 

message: Okay, so I see that ISDN voice talent is very common. Many many Google hits for people offering it:
* http://www.google.com/search?q=ISDN+voice+talent
But can it be cited? Many of these businesses may not be around tomorrow so they probably are not individually good cites. Is there a book on the topic? DMahalko (talk) 06:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISDN Voice Talent --- citable? 

message: I notice that there is virtually nothing about how old ISDN is, who developed it, its historical links to technologies that comprise or were originally designed for it, its early deployment history, or its contemporary competitors. 72.235.10.142 (talk) 13:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Development and history 

message: Why is this not done with Title Caps? It seems like it should be.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuart P. Bentley (talk • contribs) 18:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 

message: Cleaned up the India section. Rdf0 (talk) 15:43, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  India 

message: The Reference points section of this article (as well as the S interface, T interface and U interface articles) link to a Reference point article which merely is redirected to the generic Reference article, while the Reference Point article is about a Jazz album. The information in the Reference points section is far better.
I propose that the Reference point link is removed from this section and that other occurrences within the scope of ISDN is updated to point to this section. I might even get around to do this myself, unless spectacularily shot down here... 8)
--Rootmoose (talk) 15:46, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Reference point useless? 

message: In the lead: "ISDN is a circuit-switched"
"Virtual circuit switching is a packet switching technology"
I know my country has ISDN; you tend to not think of it, is at least non-ISDN circuit-switched (CN) dead? I tent to view IDSN not as CN, but packet switching, is CN (e.g. PSTN except for the numbering system) dead, with or without ISDN? [I know of PBX as a possible exception; but even those VoIP..). comp.arch (talk) 17:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is [ISDN]/circuit-switched dead? 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 23:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Integrated Services Digital Network →  – Per WP:COMMONNAME and MOS:ACROTITLE. See Google Ngram here. For a different in book titles, see here versus here. There are far more books that use the abbreviation in the title. The abbreviation is also primarily used for this subject, which means the abbreviation should be used as the title per MOS:ACROTITLE. PhotographyEdits (talk) 17:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 14 April 2024