1. Completing the Convergence: Reliable Fax over your VoIP Network
Bud Walder
Enterprise Marketing Director

2. Agenda Who is Dialogic Why is Fax Relevant in This Century
Fax Market Drivers
Faxing over IP Networks
T.30 Pass-Through vs. T.38 Fax-Relay
FoIP over SIP Trunks: Deployment Scenarios

3. Dialogic Highlights
Dialogic and Veraz Networks completed merger October 1, 2010
Listed on NASDAQ (DLGC)
Annualized revenue greater than $250M1
Leading portfolio of IP and TDM based multimedia processing and call control enabling technologies and products
World class service and support (24/7)
Deployed:
In High-Value Solutions that are in use by over 2 Billion Mobile Subscribers
In Network Infrastructure that carries over 5 Billion minutes of traffic per month
In 80% of Fortune 2000 companies
70+ issued US patents
Approximately 60 patent pending applications worldwide
Approximately 25 issued foreign patents
Businesses that make up Dialogic – history goes back to Eicon started in 1984, Dialogic in Veraz 2001.
The leading enabler for unleashing profit from video, voice and data for advanced networks
1 Following the merger and subsequent integration of the two companies and after excluding adjustments to revenue under purchase accounting rules 3 3 3

4. Rich Heritage of M&A
2006: Eicon Networks purchased Dialogic assets from Intel and renamed the company Dialogic
Converged Communications Technology Enabling Market Segment Share Leadership
Dialogic “pioneer” history, relationships and patent portfolio
Enterprise Gateway
Established SS7 / Signaling Part of Business
2007: Purchased Cantata
Extends Technology Enabling MSS Leadership
Fax Segment MSS Leadership
Deeper Service Provider Segment Products / Customers
2008: Purchased OpenMedia Labs (renamed Dialogic Media Labs) and NMS Communications products division
Extends Mobile VAS Segment Leadership
Video Algorithmic and Analytics Leadership
2009: Organic growth in the following areas
Extend into Web communication innovators
Multimedia/Video VAS enabling leadership
TDM to IP Transition Leadership
HD Voice
2010: Merged with Veraz and kept Dialogic name. Become public. 4 4

5. Broad Multimedia Processing and Call Control Infrastructure Product Portfolio
Server Platforms
Video Processing
Server Software
Dialogic® PowerMedia™ (HMP, IPMS and WMS) Server Software
Dialogic® Media and Network Interface Boards (HMP interface series of boards, DM3 series, CG series, JCT series, Diva ®series, and Brooktrout® series)
Dialogic®CSP and MSP platform
Dialogic® PowerMedia™ Server Software
Dialogic® Brooktrout® Fax Software
Bandwidth Optimization
VoIP / FoIP Gateways
Video
Gateways
Dialogic® BorderNet™, IMG, and DMG series of service provider and enterprise gateways
Dialogic I-Gate® 4000 and DTX-600 series
Dialogic I-Gate® 4000 Session Bandwidth Optimizer Core
Dialogic® Vision™ 1000 Video GW
Session Border Controller
Wireless Backhaul
Bandwidth Optimization
Dialogic® BorderNet™ 3000 SBC
Dialogic I-Gate® 4000 Session Bandwidth Optimizer Backhaul
Call Control Infrastructure
Softswitch
Signaling
Dialogic® ControlSwitch™ Softswitch
Dialogic® DSI Signaling Servers
Dialogic® TX and DSI Series of boards and software
Services
Services
Dialogic® ActionLine™ and Dialogic® Pro™ Services annuity support, installation and professional services

6. Market Drivers: The Relevancy of Fax in the 21st Century

7. Why is Fax Still Relevant in This Century?
Fax Servers
Document Management & Workflow
Production Fax & Productivity Enhancement
Compliance & Multi-Function Peripheral Integration
Fax as “table stakes” for participation in Unified Communications Market Segment
OCS
Migration to Fax over IP (FoIP)

8. What’s Driving Fax Sales Today?
Corporate networks moving to VoIP
Adoption of multi-functional peripherals (MFPs)
Regulatory compliance
Technology upgrades & interest in UM/UC
Server virtualization

9. Faxing over IP Networks Pass-Through vs. T.38 Fax-Relay

10. Traditional Faxing vs. Fax Over IP (FoIP)
Traditional Faxing is based on the T.30 Protocol
T.30 was designed for a network with relatively smooth and uninterrupted data flows.
T.30 is an audio protocol. The sending and receiving fax machines are listening to the tones generated by the other machine. If tones are distorted, then the fax image will not be transmitted correctly.

11. Why T.30 Fax Doesn’t Work Reliably on a VoIP Network
As mentioned in the previous slide, T.30 was designed for a network with relatively smooth and uninterrupted data flows
This is the opposite of the way an IP network was designed to operate. In other words the T.30 fax protocol was not created to tolerate the latency, jitter, and packet loss that are inherent in an IP network.
The audio compression that takes place on a VoIP network may not affect a Voice call but can severely affect a Fax call.

12. How (NOT) to get a fax over an IP Network
Do Nothing
Attach your fax machines to your VoIP Network and live with the 80%-90% single page success rate that is achievable this way.
However, realize that the chance of a failed transmission is exponential as the number of pages increases.
At 80% single page success rate
1 Page Fax – 80% Document Success Rate
2 Page Fax – 0.82 – 64% Document Success Rate
20 Page Fax – – 0.922% Document Success Rate
55 Page Fax – – 0.000% Document Success Rate

13. Faxing over an IP Network Option 1: Fax Pass-Through
A simple technique for creating a “fax friendly" environment on a VoIP network.
Makes very little distinction between voice calls and fax calls.
Also called Voice Band Data (VBD) by the ITU, it refers to the transport of fax or modem signals over a voice channel through a packet network with an encoding appropriate for fax or modem signals.
G.711 (u-law or a-law)
Voice Activity Detection (VAD) off
Echo Cancelation (EC) off

14. Establishing a Fax Pass-Through Session
Two Techniques
Dedicated Fax Trunks
All ATAs, IADs, and gateways to be permanently locked at G.711 with VAD and EC disabled
Easy to manage but the cost is the loss of the having a dedicated fax trunk
More expensive
Severely restricts the ability of telecom administrators to take advantage of any trunk sharing capabilities available with the PBX or IP-PBX in their infrastructure.
Dynamically Configured Fax Trunks
Gateways that are able to distinguish between a voice call and a fax call in real time by detecting the V.21 preamble, which is part of all fax calls. Once this preamble is detected, the gateway automatically switches to Fax Pass-Through mode
David Haynes and Gonzalo Salguiero, Fax, Modem, and Text for IP Telephony (Cisco Press, 2008)

15. Faxing over an IP Network Option 2: T.38 ‘Fax Relay’
Breaks down the T.30 fax tones into their HDLC frames (known as demodulation) before sending the fax information through the network.
This information is sent across the voice network using the T.38 Fax Relay protocol, and is then converted back into T.30 fax tones at the endpoint (known as modulation).
The fax machines on either end are sending and receiving tones and are not aware that any demodulation or modulation is occurring.
Uses a variety of techniques to keep the T.30 session communication between two T.30 endpoints from failing even when significant delay, jitter, and packet-loss occur.

16. Fax Pass-Through vs. T.38 Fax Relay
T.30 Fax Pass-Through
G.711 (u-law or a-law)
Voice Activity Detection (VAD) off
Echo Cancelation (EC) off
Move the audio (fax tones) through the network with as little distortion as possible
T.38 Fax Relay
Demodulate the tones as close to the sending machine as possible.
Remodulate the tones as close to the receiving machine as possible

17. Fax Pass-Through vs. T.38 Fax Relay (con’t)
How do these two methods hold up in the face of Delay, Packet Loss and Jitter?

18. Effects of Delay, Packet Loss and Jitter on FoIP
The packet-based networks performance requirements for real-time facsimile transmission - Tomaz Aljaz, Bohan Imperl, Urban Mrak, December 2006 18

19. Effects of Delay on FoIP
The effects of fixed delay were nominal on both image quality and success rate.
The test page was sent successfully (nearly 100% success rate) in both pass-through and relay mode with no image distortion.
Increase in delay did result in measurably longer transmission times (as much as 15% longer transmission times with 500ms of network delay).
Delay increased transmission time more significantly in Relay Mode than it did in Pass-Through Mode.
The effects of delay (that is fixed delay, not variable delay) were nominal on both image quality and success rate. The test page was sent successfully (nearly 100% success rate) in both pass-through and relay mode with no image distortion. Increase in delay did result in measurably longer transmission times (as much as 15% longer transmission times with 500ms of network delay). Delay increased transmission time more significantly in Relay Mode than it did in Pass-Through Mode.
The effects of packet loss were much more significant. At 1% packet loss, single page success rate fell to below 80% for every configuration except for T.38 in redundant mode. The Success rate in T.38 Redundant mode stayed above 80% until packet loss exceed 4%. While 80% success rate may seem acceptable for a single page, at that level of throughput, a fax document greater that 20 pages has less than a 1% chance of successful delivery; a 55 page fax statistically (at 3 significant digits) cannot be delivered successfully.
Another interesting result of this study determined that in pass-though mode, no distinction could be made between the effects of random packet loss and bursty packet loss. However, in relay mode, bursty packet loss in which more than 10 packets in a row are lost, will significantly impact the success rate even when in redundant mode.
The effect of jitter (that is variable delay, not fixed delay) is very significant. In short, introducing jitter into the network had NO EFFECT when sending faxes via T.38. With a nominal delay of 60 ms and the maximum length of the jitter buffer sent to 100 ms, success rate fell to below 80% with delay variance of as little as 17ms in some configurations. Other configurations did stay about 80% success rate until the variance reached 25ms. It needs to be pointed out that when the maximum size of the jitter is set equal to the expected nominal delay, success rate in pass-though mode does increase. However, increasing the maximum length of the jitter buffer to match the nominal delay will have a negative effect on the quality of the voice conversations that will be carried over the converged network.
The net takeaway from the research on the effects of delay, packet loss and jitter with respect to pass-through fax clearly indicates a reduction in the reliability of fax transmission. Therefore serious consideration should be paid to adopting the Fax Relay (T.38) approach, since fax pass-through may not provide the level of service required for many business fax applications.

20. Effects of Jitter on FoIP – T.38 Fax Relay
Jitter has no effect when sending faxes via T.38 Fax Relay
“It was not possible to recreate a network condition in the testing environment that the T.38 protocol, in redundant or non-redundant mode, could not have coped with.”
- Toma Aljaz, Boyan Imperl, and Urban Mrak, “The packet-based networks performance requirements for real-time facsimile transmission,” Computer Communications, Volume 30, Number 6, pp (March 2007)
The effects of delay (that is fixed delay, not variable delay) were nominal on both image quality and success rate. The test page was sent successfully (nearly 100% success rate) in both pass-through and relay mode with no image distortion. Increase in delay did result in measurably longer transmission times (as much as 15% longer transmission times with 500ms of network delay). Delay increased transmission time more significantly in Relay Mode than it did in Pass-Through Mode.
The effects of packet loss were much more significant. At 1% packet loss, single page success rate fell to below 80% for every configuration except for T.38 in redundant mode. The Success rate in T.38 Redundant mode stayed above 80% until packet loss exceed 4%. While 80% success rate may seem acceptable for a single page, at that level of throughput, a fax document greater that 20 pages has less than a 1% chance of successful delivery; a 55 page fax statistically (at 3 significant digits) cannot be delivered successfully.
Another interesting result of this study determined that in pass-though mode, no distinction could be made between the effects of random packet loss and bursty packet loss. However, in relay mode, bursty packet loss in which more than 10 packets in a row are lost, will significantly impact the success rate even when in redundant mode.
The effect of jitter (that is variable delay, not fixed delay) is very significant. In short, introducing jitter into the network had NO EFFECT when sending faxes via T.38. With a nominal delay of 60 ms and the maximum length of the jitter buffer sent to 100 ms, success rate fell to below 80% with delay variance of as little as 17ms in some configurations. Other configurations did stay about 80% success rate until the variance reached 25ms. It needs to be pointed out that when the maximum size of the jitter is set equal to the expected nominal delay, success rate in pass-though mode does increase. However, increasing the maximum length of the jitter buffer to match the nominal delay will have a negative effect on the quality of the voice conversations that will be carried over the converged network.
The net takeaway from the research on the effects of delay, packet loss and jitter with respect to pass-through fax clearly indicates a reduction in the reliability of fax transmission. Therefore serious consideration should be paid to adopting the Fax Relay (T.38) approach, since fax pass-through may not provide the level of service required for many business fax applications. 20

21. Effects of Jitter on FoIP – Fax Pass-Through
Jitter has significant negative impact on Fax Pass-Through
With a nominal delay of 60 ms and the maximum length of the jitter buffer set to 100 ms, the success rate for faxes sent using Fax Pass-Through fell to below 80% with delay variance of as little as 17 ms in some configurations.
Other configurations did stay at about an 80% success rate until the variance reached 25 ms.
The amount of Variance is more significant the degree of Variance.
Success rate in Pass-Through mode increased when the maximum size of the jitter was set equal to the expected nominal delay. Increasing the maximum length of the jitter buffer to match the nominal delay had a negative effect on the quality of the voice conversations carried over the converged network.
The effects of delay (that is fixed delay, not variable delay) were nominal on both image quality and success rate. The test page was sent successfully (nearly 100% success rate) in both pass-through and relay mode with no image distortion. Increase in delay did result in measurably longer transmission times (as much as 15% longer transmission times with 500ms of network delay). Delay increased transmission time more significantly in Relay Mode than it did in Pass-Through Mode.
The effects of packet loss were much more significant. At 1% packet loss, single page success rate fell to below 80% for every configuration except for T.38 in redundant mode. The Success rate in T.38 Redundant mode stayed above 80% until packet loss exceed 4%. While 80% success rate may seem acceptable for a single page, at that level of throughput, a fax document greater that 20 pages has less than a 1% chance of successful delivery; a 55 page fax statistically (at 3 significant digits) cannot be delivered successfully.
Another interesting result of this study determined that in pass-though mode, no distinction could be made between the effects of random packet loss and bursty packet loss. However, in relay mode, bursty packet loss in which more than 10 packets in a row are lost, will significantly impact the success rate even when in redundant mode.
The effect of jitter (that is variable delay, not fixed delay) is very significant. In short, introducing jitter into the network had NO EFFECT when sending faxes via T.38. With a nominal delay of 60 ms and the maximum length of the jitter buffer sent to 100 ms, success rate fell to below 80% with delay variance of as little as 17ms in some configurations. Other configurations did stay about 80% success rate until the variance reached 25ms. It needs to be pointed out that when the maximum size of the jitter is set equal to the expected nominal delay, success rate in pass-though mode does increase. However, increasing the maximum length of the jitter buffer to match the nominal delay will have a negative effect on the quality of the voice conversations that will be carried over the converged network.
The net takeaway from the research on the effects of delay, packet loss and jitter with respect to pass-through fax clearly indicates a reduction in the reliability of fax transmission. Therefore serious consideration should be paid to adopting the Fax Relay (T.38) approach, since fax pass-through may not provide the level of service required for many business fax applications. 21

22. Effects of Packet Loss on FoIP
In all cases except T.38 in Redundant mode, just 1% packet loss caused 20% single-page failure rate
In T.38R Mode, single-page Success Rate stayed above 80% until packet loss exceed 4%
Caveat:
Even in T.38R mode, bursty packet loss in which more than 10 packets in a row are lost, will significantly impact the success rate mode
The effects of delay (that is fixed delay, not variable delay) were nominal on both image quality and success rate. The test page was sent successfully (nearly 100% success rate) in both pass-through and relay mode with no image distortion. Increase in delay did result in measurably longer transmission times (as much as 15% longer transmission times with 500ms of network delay). Delay increased transmission time more significantly in Relay Mode than it did in Pass-Through Mode.
The effects of packet loss were much more significant. At 1% packet loss, single page success rate fell to below 80% for every configuration except for T.38 in redundant mode. The Success rate in T.38 Redundant mode stayed above 80% until packet loss exceed 4%. While 80% success rate may seem acceptable for a single page, at that level of throughput, a fax document greater that 20 pages has less than a 1% chance of successful delivery; a 55 page fax statistically (at 3 significant digits) cannot be delivered successfully.
Another interesting result of this study determined that in pass-though mode, no distinction could be made between the effects of random packet loss and bursty packet loss. However, in relay mode, bursty packet loss in which more than 10 packets in a row are lost, will significantly impact the success rate even when in redundant mode.
The effect of jitter (that is variable delay, not fixed delay) is very significant. In short, introducing jitter into the network had NO EFFECT when sending faxes via T.38. With a nominal delay of 60 ms and the maximum length of the jitter buffer sent to 100 ms, success rate fell to below 80% with delay variance of as little as 17ms in some configurations. Other configurations did stay about 80% success rate until the variance reached 25ms. It needs to be pointed out that when the maximum size of the jitter is set equal to the expected nominal delay, success rate in pass-though mode does increase. However, increasing the maximum length of the jitter buffer to match the nominal delay will have a negative effect on the quality of the voice conversations that will be carried over the converged network.
The net takeaway from the research on the effects of delay, packet loss and jitter with respect to pass-through fax clearly indicates a reduction in the reliability of fax transmission. Therefore serious consideration should be paid to adopting the Fax Relay (T.38) approach, since fax pass-through may not provide the level of service required for many business fax applications. 22

23. Effects of Delay, Packet Loss and Jitter on FoIP - Summary
IP Network Issue
T.30 Pass-Through
Success rates
T.38 Fax Relay Success Rates
Delay
Minimal Impact
Jitter
Significant Impact
Packet Loss
Minor Impact

24. Conclusion: T.38 = Reliable FoIP
At 80% Single Page Success rate:
A fax document of more than 20 pages has less than a 1% chance of success.
A 55 Page Fax statistically cannot be delivered successfully.
T.38 Fax Relay must be implemented throughout the network to meet the needs of the Market Place.
In Addition, a T.38 call uses 20% of the amount of bandwidth needed for Fax Pass-Through. Fax Relay is a T.38 fax transmission that uses a stream of bits running at an average speed of 14,400 bps. Fax Pass-Through is a G.711 stream of audio samples running at 64,000 bps. Using Fax Relay can result in a bandwidth savings of 80% over Fax Pass-Through.

25. FoIP over SIP Trunks: Deployment Issues

26. Deploying Fax and FoIP Deployment Scenarios Fax Server + PBX / PSTN
FoIP Server + T.38 Gateway + PSTN Service
FoIP Server + T.38 IP-PBX + PSTN Service
FoIP Server + SBC / Gateway + T.38 enabled SIP Trunk Service
Fax Server (TDM) + T.38 Gateway + SIP Trunk

27. Circuit-Switched Faxing
Fax Machine
Fax Server
T.30
PSTN
T.30
Desktop Fax Application
image conversion engine
image conversion engine
T.30 protocol
T.30 protocol
T.30 data
PSTN interface
PSTN interface
64 kbps bandwidth

28. Faxing with a FoIP gateway
FoIPServer
PBX
FoIP Gateway
Traditional Fax Machine
PSTN
Desktop Fax Application
T.38
image conversion engine
image conversion engine
T.30
T.30 protocol
T.30 protocol
T.38 end point protocol
T.38 fax relay protocol
T.38 data
much less
bandwidth
T.30 data
IP network interface
PSTN IP
PSTN interface

29. FoIP with an Interoperable IP-PBX
FoIPServer
IP-PBX
Traditional Fax Machine
PSTN
Desktop Fax Application
T.38
T.30
image conversion engine
image conversion engine
T.30 protocol
T.30 protocol
T.38 end point protocol
T.38 fax relay protocol
T.38 data
much less
bandwidth
T.30 data
IP network interface
PSTN IP
PSTN interface

30. FoIP with an Interoperable SBC and SIP Trunk Service
ISP
ITSP
PSTN
Fax Machine
SIP Trunk Service
w/ T.38 Support
SIP Interop
SIP QoS Demarcation
SIP Security
TDM / PSTN Gateway
Firewall / NAT Traversal
Fax / FoIP Gateway
Broadband Internet Service
PSTN Failover / Alternate Route
Dialogic® BorderNet™ 500 Gateway w/ Session Border Control
IP-PBX
FoIP Server
IP-Phone
IP Soft-Phone
ATA / FXS Gateway
Fax Machine
POTs Phone
* - Please refer to ‘USE CASE(S)’ portion of the Legal Notice on the last slide

31. Faxing with an Interoperable SBC / Gateway and SIP Trunk Service
ISP
ITSP
PSTN
Fax Machine
SIP Trunk Service
w/ T.38 Support
SIP Interop
SIP QoS Demarcation
SIP Security
TDM / PSTN Gateway
Firewall / NAT Traversal
Fax / FoIP Gateway
Broadband Internet Service
Optional PBX / PSTN Gateway Connectivity Support
Legacy PBX (non-SIP)
BorderNet 500 Gateway w/ Session Border Control
Fax Servers
Corporate LAN / WAN
Digital Phone
POTs Phone
Fax Machine
* - Please refer to ‘USE CASE(S)’ portion of the Legal Notice on the last slide

32. Dialogic® Products that Support T.38
Dialogic® Brooktrout® TR1034 Fax Boards Dialogic® Brooktrout® SR140 Fax Software Dialogic® Host Media Processing (HMP) Software Dialogic® IP Media Server Dialogic ® Integrated Media Gateways Dialogic® Media Gateway Series Dialogic® BorderNet™ 500 Gateways

33. Why Choose Dialogic?
Dialogic Enables our Partners to Create Innovative Applications in a Timely Manner, and is Investing to grow its position as the #1 Open Systems provider for the Converged Communication Market segment
Engineering
Sales and Marketing
Unrivaled Ecosystem of Partners
Dialogic and our Products are there for you so you can Deliver your Solution to Market
Global Experience and Presence
World Class Service And Support (24x7)
Building Blocks At All Levels For Service Providers And Enterprise
Product Reliability and Delivery
Network Vision: Not radically changing it since no need to. The vision is correct and it is happening.
Market leadership in IP
Pioneered the SIP-controlled media server
Market leader in fax processing technology and FoIP (wrote the spec)
Highest 1U density integrated media and signaling gateway
Leadership in enabling cutting-edge applications
First deployment of 3G video messaging on SnowShore IP media server at TMN in Portugal
Rapid deployment of video ringback tone application: 4 weeks
Leadership in driving and defining standards
Contributed to over 25 IETF RFCs and internet drafts, as well as 13 other standards in the ITU, W3C, IPCC, and Packetcable
Customer leadership
Product vision: Aligns to what we think is happening. Will be a migration to IP and wireless so we are still investing in and supporting our world-class TDM products. In the SP world, we have PC Express, ATCA and RMS IP-enabled multimedia and signaling products that will enable you to migrate to IMS world (which is coming, but not quite here yet). In Enterprise, same thing. Gateways remain very important in the heterogeneous world.
Technical strategy is to use HMP as multimedia processing engine, with hw accelerators as necessary, to yield best price/performance. This also has benefit of when move to IP world, we are there already! And this means you will be there as well!

34. Wrap Up Fax is Still Relevant Today
TDM solution are giving way to FoIP solutions
There are both benefits and pitfalls to be aware of when moving to an FoIP solution
There are many options when implementing an FoIP Solution
Internal Hardware
Software Only Solutions
Gateways and Appliances
Virtualized Solutions
SIP Trunking
Hosted Solutions

35. Dialogic, Dialogic Pro, Brooktrout, Diva, Diva ISDN, Making Innovation Thrive, Video is the New Voice, Diastar, Cantata, TruFax, SwitchKit, SnowShore, Eicon, Eicon Networks, NMS Communications, NMS (stylized), Eiconcard, SIPcontrol, TrustedVideo, Exnet, EXS, Connecting to Growth, Fusion, Vision, PacketMedia, NaturalAccess, NaturalCallControl, NaturalConference, NaturalFax and Shiva, among others as well as related logos, are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Dialogic Corporation or its subsidiaries (“Dialogic”). The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners. Dialogic encourages all users of its products to procure all necessary intellectual property licenses required to implement their concepts or applications, which licenses may vary from country to country. Dialogic may make changes to specifications, product descriptions, and plans at any time, without notice.
This document discusses one or more open source products, systems and/or releases. Dialogic is not responsible for your decision to use open source in connection with Dialogic products (including without limitation those referred to herein), nor is Dialogic responsible for any present or future effects such usage might have, including without limitation effects on your products, your business, or your intellectual property rights.
USE CASE(S) Any use case(s) shown and/or described herein represent one or more examples of the various ways, scenarios or environments in which Dialogic products can be used.  Such use case(s) are non-limiting and do not represent recommendations of Dialogic as to whether or how to use Dialogic products.
06/10

36. Completing the Convergence: Reliable Fax over your VoIP Network
Q & A
Jeff Dworkin

37. Driver : Enterprise Adoption of VoIP
VoIP = Voice over IP
Why Put Voice on an IP Network?
Convergence reduces operating expense
Using VoIP reduces telephony costs
Other VoIP Drivers
End-user productivity
PBX providers driving upgrades (e.g., Cisco, Avaya)
VoIP Deployments Drive the Need for FoIP
As part of the migration to VoIP, enterprises need to move their fax infrastructure to IP
What is VoIP?
The technology used to transmit voice conversations over a data network using the Internet Protocol (IP)
Why put voice on an IP network?
Convergence of voice and data onto a single network reduces operating expense and simplifies
Using VoIP can dramatically reduce telephony costs
Merging IT & Voice Functions is one of Top 3 CIO priorities for 2007
*CIO Survey of Top Reasons for Implementing VoIP Networks
Other VoIP Drivers
Standardization (IP, SIP) allows greater choice, interoperability and flexibility
End-user productivity gains result from tighter integration with infrastructure, messaging systems, etc.
Enterprise equipment providers (e.g., Cisco, Avaya) aggressively market VoIP raising awareness and interest
VoIP deployments drive the need for FoIP
Enterprises are moving their communications infrastructure to VoIP. As part of that migration, they need to move their fax infrastructure to IP

38. Driver : Continued Adoption of MFPs
MFP = multi-function peripheral
Enables consolidation & centralization of Fax infrastructure
Easier to manage a single shared resource
Elimination of Fax machines and associated costs
Sales of MFPs will grow 24% by 2010 (IDC)
MFPs Drive Growth of Fax Servers
MFP related fax server sales projected to grow 25% CAGR through 2011 (Davidson)
Adoption of MFPs creates demand for IP-based Fax
Notes for the above slide
MFPs are replacing stand-alone fax machines
Davidson says fax server market will grow 25% through 2011 primarily driven by the integration of MFPs with fax servers
According to Captaris…
25% of all MFPs are purchased with the fax module option
Average MFP fax module costs $1000 per MFP
The MFP fax module market ~ $750M
Current fax server market ~ $250M
Software and boards combined
Why is this significant?
Much corporate fax traffic is still processed by fax machines
Simply consider that the “dying” fax machine is still a bigger market than fax server market (6,000,000 $100 per machine = $600M market)
Fax server is an imperfect alternative to the fax machine
Companies still need to “walk up” and fax
Fax machines are not attached to the LAN
MFPs are replacing fax machines in corporate infrastructure
MFP with embedded fax module is growing at expense of fax machines
MFPs are connected to the LAN
Integrating MFPs with a fax server has many benefits while retaining “walk up” fax functionality
Enables consolidation & centralization of fax infrastructure
Captures all fax traffic including “walk up” faxes
Compliance; automatic archival; mitigates operational risk
Easier to manage a single shared resource (fax server) instead of many endpoints (MFPs with fax modules)
All the benefits of a fax server plus it eliminates fax machines and associated maintenance costs

39. Driver : Compliance Regulations
E.g. Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPAA, USA Patriot Act
Forces businesses to track all messages and paper transactions, retrieve them, and to secure them confidentially
Personal liability of directors
Drives increased use of MFPs and Fax Servers

40. Driver: Technology Upgrades
Upgrades of Servers
OS upgrades can drive server changes
PCI, PCI-X to PCI-Express issues
Boards to board-less IP-based technology
Easy opportunity to introduce/sell FoIP
Upgrades of PBXs
Depending on vendor, IP migration may require an all-IP solution including Fax
A natural opportunity to introduce/sell FoIP

41. Driver: Server Virtualization
Virtual server technology (e.g. VMware, virtual server or Hyper-V) support multiple PC images running on one physical PC.
Fax boards are not supported in virtual servers so all-software solutions are required – FoIP is the answer.
This is also important for business continuity and disaster recovery plans.
Continuity and Disaster Planning

42. Software Only Solution vs. Virtualization
Even though solution may exist as “Software Only” that does not guarantee that they can be virtualized.
You still may need a Dedicated Server for each instance of the software
Fax Server #1
Fax Server #2
CRM Server #1
CRM Server #2

43. Software Only Solution vs. Virtualization
Fax Server #1
Fax Server #2
CRM Server #1
CRM Server #2
Virtual Server #1
Virtual Server #2

44. Software Only Solution vs. Virtualization
Now you only have two servers
Each one is running both applications
Fax Server
CRM Server
Real Virtualization
Real Redundancy
Virtual Server #1
Virtual Server #2

45. Delay
Latency is the amount of time it takes for a sound uttered at one end of a conversation to arrive at the ear of the distant end of the conversation.
Delay (or Fixed Delay) is that part of Latency that is a result of the physical configuration and/or design of the system
Processor Speed to Packetize
Distance the Packets have to travel
Processor Speed to DePacketize
It is defined in a Perfect World

46. Jitter
Jitter is the Variable portion of Latency caused by the randomness of the World in general and the IP Network in particular
Load on the processor doing the packetization
Network Traffic
Routing Errors
Load on the processor doing the depacketization
In a VoIP Implementation this variability is managed using a Jitter Buffer

47. Packet Loss
Packet loss occurs when one or more packets of data traveling across a computer network fail to reach their destination.
Packet loss can be caused by a number of factors
Signal degradation over the network medium
Oversaturated network links
Corrupted packets rejected in-transit
Faulty networking hardware
Maligned system drivers or network applications
Normal routing routines

48. FoIP Server + Media Gateway: Example Use Cases*
Enables FoIP Server in TDM and Hybrid PBX Environment
Enables Fax Server to be Deployed as a Virtual Server
Enables Centralized Fax Servers for Multi-Site Organizations
T.30 Fax
T.38 FoIP
Dialogic® 2000 Media Gateway Series
PSTN
PBX
Dialogic® Brooktrout® SR140 Fax Software-based Fax Server
WAN
* - Please refer to ‘USE CASE(S)’ portion of the
Legal Notice on the last slide
Remote Site
PBX

49. Appliance use in a VoIP/FoIP Implementation
IP Telephony Service Provider
IP Network
PSTN
PSTN-VoIP
Gateway
Broadband Internet Access
Firewall
IP PBX / Contact Center
Corporate Voice and Data LAN
Introduction to the following pages.
Short, this is the normal situation.
Virtualized
Fax Server

50. Benefits Offered by using Appliances
Fax documents are moved through the corporate WAN rather than into the PSTN or to the ITSP, reducing long distance telephony costs
Using Centralized Servers (with Appliances at the edge) to reduce capital and operational expenses
Appliances are easy to install and may be remotely configured, reducing associated time and expense while still being able to increase the capacity of the implementation as needed
Appliances enhance reliability, redundancy and survivability

51. SIP Trunking in a VoIP/FoIP Implementation
IP Telephony Service Provider
IP Network
PSTN
Broadband Internet Access
PSTN-VoIP
Gateway
PSTN-VoIP
Gateway
Firewall
IP PBX / Contact Center
Corporate Voice and Data LAN
Introduction to the following pages.
Short, this is the normal situation.
Virtualized
Fax Server

52. Benefits Offered by using SIP Trunking
By maintaining only a single data network, rather than a voice network, SIP Trunking can reduce capital and operational expenses
Without a connection to the PSTN, business operations can be streamlined with fewer vendors to deal with
Interoperability and Gateway maintenance are handled by the carrier rather than the enterprise, reducing operational complexity and expenses

53. Hosted Services in a VoIP/FoIP Implementation
IP Telephony Service Provider
IP Network
PSTN
Virtualized
Fax Server
Broadband Internet Access
PSTN-VoIP
Gateway
Firewall
IP PBX / Contact Center
Corporate Voice and Data LAN
Introduction to the following pages.
Short, this is the normal situation.
Virtualized
Fax Server

54. Benefits Offered by using Hosted Fax Services
Effectively manage Overflow or Unexpected Spikes in usage
Minimize Capital Outlay and Potential Obsolescence Issues
Remove geographic limitation of a CPE based solution
Disaster Recovery
Business Continuity

55. Fax is NOT Going Away
The Marketing for Individual Fax Machines in Shrinking
But the Fax Server Marketing is actually Growing
“The Fax over IP Fax Server segment is expected to show a Compounded Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 39.2% through 2011 and be worth $340 million.”
Davidson Consulting, Computer-Based Fax Marketing, (December 2007)

56. References
[Aljaz] Toma Aljaz, Boyan Imperl, and Urban Mrak, “The packet-based networks performance requirements for real-time facsimile transmission,” Computer Communications, Volume 30, Number 6, pp (March 2007)
[Davidson] Davidson Consulting, Computer-Based Fax Marketing, (December 2007)
[Haynes] David Haynes and Gonzalo Salguiero, Fax, Modem, and Text for IP Telephony (Cisco Press, 2008)