The Role of VoIP For Large University Telecom Networks

Ethan Chambers Jamie Daubendiek

Kanu Gupta Brian McNelly

Monika Parulekar

ITP Capstone Advisor, Gerald Mitchell

University of Colorado at Boulder April 24, 2008

1

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank those individuals that provided valuable information and

contributed to our Capstone. This paper would not have been possible without the expertise and

generosity of the following:

Gerald Mitchell

Brad Bernthal Steve Carlson

Doug Chernow Victor O Mendez Ferreira

Jane Folger Luke Hartwig Dale Hatfield Scott Savage Jose Valdez Brad Wesley David Wood Valerie Yates

2

Introduction ..............................................................................................................................3 Background ...............................................................................................................................4

Circuit-Switched Technology ...............................................................................................4 VoIP Technology...................................................................................................................5 CU Voice and Data Networks...............................................................................................6

Analysis .....................................................................................................................................7 Concerns for VoIP ................................................................................................................7

Quality of Service ..............................................................................................................8 Security ..............................................................................................................................9 Power and Reliability......................................................................................................11 E-911 ................................................................................................................................13 Proposed VoIP Deployment............................................................................................15 Costs.................................................................................................................................17

User Section.........................................................................................................................20 Avaya PBX Features .......................................................................................................20 Survey Features...............................................................................................................21

Other Universities With VoIP Implementation .................................................................23 Future Considerations for CU............................................................................................24

Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................25 Works Cited ............................................................................................................................27 Appendix .................................................................................................................................29

3

Introduction

Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) is an emerging technology that is being adopted by

many organizations because of the enhanced voice features it offers and the reduction in costs

that may be achieved. Circuit-switched technologies that have worked well for voice

communication in the past are now starting to be replaced by VoIP.

The University of Colorado at Boulder (“CU” or “University”) will pay off a loan for the

campus private branch exchange (PBX) from Avaya in the summer of 2008. ITS will make a

decision on whether to keep the current circuit-switched infrastructure or to adopt a new voice

technology in order to reduce costs and increase features. This Capstone analyzed the perceived

cost savings and expected feature enhancements from VoIP to make a recommendation on

whether CU should adopt VoIP technology into the current infrastructure.

Based on the research of the Capstone group, a high-level VoIP network was designed

for future CU academic and administrative buildings in order to examine the possibility of a

VoIP implementation. During the analysis, shortcomings of a VoIP implementation at CU led

the Capstone group to conclude that there are no compelling reasons to adopt the technology in

the near future. The Information Technology Services (ITS) of CU should try to meet the needs

of the stakeholders (faculty, staff, administration and other users) by implementing add-ons and

upgrades to the current circuit-switched infrastructure. This is advised until the maintenance

costs of the PBX are greater than the investment required to implement VoIP.

The Capstone analyzed numerous case studies on deploying VoIP, however, these

contained little information on end user preferences and expectations. The Capstone group

developed a survey to understand if Internet protocol (IP) telephony could satisfy the current

telecommunications needs of the stakeholders. This research is focused only on CU’s internal

4

network and did not consider the impacts of using VoIP over the public switched telephone

network (PSTN) or public Internet. This Capstone also did not perform testing on VoIP or

circuit-switched equipment. Case studies from other universities, data from CU’s network, and

the Capstone user survey (“survey”) were analyzed and used to answer our primary research

question; “Should CU and similar universities migrate to a VoIP environment?”

Background

Circuit-Switched Technology

After 125 years, circuit-switched networks are still used by many organizations as the

primary technology for voice communication. Circuit-switched technology was initially designed

to carry voice traffic and continues to perform very well today. During a circuit-switched call,

voice is converted to electrical signals and transmitted on a dedicated line to a central office

(CO). Once the call is established, there is no contention with other traffic for network resources.

The dedicated line is a great advantage of circuit-switched technology because it provides

security, quality of service (QoS), and reliability. In order for a third-party, who is not on the

call, to hear a circuit-switched voice conversation, they have to physically access the

transmission medium and perform a wiretap. Circuit-switched networks are designed to provide

five 9’s of reliability (99.999%), which means service is unavailable for less than five minutes

per year (Collins 2003). Also regarding reliability, a telephone receives power through the

transmission lines from a PBX or CO. Backup power in the PBX allows telephones to still be

available for service during a commercial electrical power outage. This high reliability of the

PBX is an advantage during emergencies because the dedicated line to each telephone allows

accurate physical location information to be sent to 911 responders. Although the dedicated line

5

in circuit-switched networks will ensure reliability, the technology also produces bandwidth

inefficiencies, for example when the line is not utilized during periods of silence.

VoIP Technology

VoIP technology was developed in the mid 1990’s to replace the inefficiencies of circuit-

switched technology by transmitting voice traffic over a data network. VoIP can produce

significant cost savings and transmission efficiencies by combining voice and data services onto

the same IP network; eliminating duplicate circuit-switched cabling and call control equipment.

VoIP can offer more features to the user that will integrate functions of the voice and data

system. In VoIP, there is no dedicated physical line, causing voice packets to interact with other

traffic on the network. During network congestion, the voice packets may be delayed or dropped

leading to degraded voice quality.

There are also other problems with implementing VoIP, such as QoS concerns, network

security vulnerabilities, reliability, and more. For example, the real-time nature of voice can

withstand some packet loss and tolerates little delay. With VoIP, a university needs to consider

security threats like Denial of Service (DoS) attacks, man-in-the-middle, and eavesdropping.

Another concern is power for VoIP, which is different than traditional circuit-switched networks.

An IP phone needs to be plugged into an electrical outlet instead of receiving power from the

PBX. This causes concerns when implementing VoIP because special considerations are then

needed for 911 services. The mobility of VoIP requires dynamic IP addresses which leads to

concerns over the accuracy and integrity of enhanced 911 (E-911) location databases. Each of

these concerns will be analyzed below describing how CU should address the problems.

6

CU Voice and Data Networks

The CU communications backbone provides high redundancy and sufficient bandwidth to

service traffic from the separate data and voice networks. The University’s voice network is a

circuit-switched distributed system managed by an Avaya PBX which connects to more than

16,000 users (Folger 2008). David Wood, ITS administrator, stated that the voice network

connects to the Qwest Boulder Main CO via a broadband Integrated Services Digital Network

(BISDN) connection (see Figure 1). The ITS and the Engineering building use synchronized

ATM switches to provide redundancy for the campus voice processing. The redundant network

connects to fifteen remote locations on and off campus (Williams Village, East campus,

Humanities, etc.) using an ATM backbone deployed over fiber links (Wood-2 2008). From these

remote modules, lines are connected to individual building telecommunication closets and then

distributed to each phone jack in the building.

Figure 1 - Current CU Voice Network Architecture

7

Wood specified that the University uses six hundred closet switches to provide end user

connectivity to one or more of ten access routers, which have redundant connections to the core

routers (see Figure 2). The core routers connect to two distribution switches (DSW) at the ITS

Community Center and Telecom building. Various high bandwidth carriers (Qwest, Verizon, and

AT&T) connect CU to the public Internet through the DSWs. (Wood-2 2008). The diagram

below is the current CU data network.

Figure 2 - Current CU Data Network Architecture

Analysis Concerns for VoIP

Before adopting VoIP, there are many security, QoS, power, and 911 issues to consider,

which circuit-switched networks are not affected by. Solutions exist to make a VoIP

8

implementation match the standards of the circuit-switched technology, but they come with great

commitments in time, cost and expertise. This analysis will first comprise of problems with

VoIP, followed by a section on the CU end user, and then conclude with how this research can

be applied to other universities.

Quality of Service

VoIP’s advanced features and lower costs have attracted many large organizations, but

the technology falls short of the impeccable reputation of circuit-switched networks in terms of

quality and reliability. In fact, the number one VoIP concern from the survey (49% of

respondents) was voice quality. Latency, jitter, and packet loss in a VoIP implementation can

adversely impact voice clarity, making it difficult to match the quality of circuit-switched

networks. The delay of circuit-switched networks lies within the range 150 ms, which the human

ear is unable to detect (Chong and Matthews 2004). However, the delay using VoIP can be up to

400 ms, which is unacceptable for a voice conversation (Chong and Matthews). Another major

drawback is VoIP’s dependency on bandwidth because a broadband connection may be down,

poor, or shared for other data communication needs. The QoS challenge for VoIP is to achieve

acceptable voice quality while transmitting voice packets over a limited and shared bandwidth

(DMR Communications n.d.).

According to Hedge and Naraghi-Pour (2001), there are a few solutions that ITS should

design into a VoIP network to ensure an acceptable QoS. On the smallest scale, QoS can be

enforced by configuring the router to a specified set of network policies to ensure voice traffic is

prioritized over other data traffic. Traffic prioritization can be obtained by configuring Multi-

Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) on the existing routers. The resource reservation protocol

9

(RSVP) ensures that a VoIP call has the necessary bandwidth between the two users before the

start of a conversation.

Most of the existing CU campus routers are Cisco models and no additional hardware or

software is needed to implement the required QoS for VoIP. Rather, logically separating voice

and data into different broadcast domains, or virtual local area networks (VLAN), for voice and

data reduces contention for bandwidth, thereby increasing QoS (Wood-1 2008).VLANs help

decrease delay caused when voice packets compete with bursty data traffic for same resources.

Using VLANS will allow ITS a way to monitor and manage the different types of traffic and

even prioritize voice to gain a better QoS. Additionally, a QoS protocol named DiffServ can be

configured on Cisco equipment to prioritize packets in the IP network according to class of

service (voice, data, e-mail, etc.) (Hedge and Naraghi-Pour 2001). The protocols mentioned will

provide the required QoS for voice traffic, however, ITS will need to test the QoS periodically to

assure that users receive acceptable QoS.

Circuit-switched networks, in contrast, have little delay, minimal loss of transmission,

and the ease of implementing QoS is far greater than VoIP (Collins 2003). The University’s

private IP network would require the additional configuration of VLANs, RSVP, MPLS and

DiffServ to favor real-time voice traffic over data traffic in a VoIP environment and match the

QoS of CU’s current voice network.

Security

VoIP traffic is sent over a data network, which means that phone calls are subject to the

same type of attacks as traditional IP traffic. VoIP creates a link between both the data and voice

networks, especially in softphones. Attacks like DoS, misrepresentation, man-in-the-middle

(eavesdropping), and theft of service can wreck havoc on the integrity and reputation of the

10

University. While many security vulnerabilities can be solved, voice conversations can become

delayed if more VoIP security and encryption techniques are added, increasing the processing

time (McNelly 2007).

There are in-house solutions to prevent some of these security vulnerabilities, but they

can be cumbersome and expensive. An essential security precaution is to use VLANs to separate

the voice and data traffic so that voice conversations can have specific security policies which

are applicable to real-time traffic. To protect against attacks, Stanton suggests the use of

"[a]ntivirus solutions that protect against malware; appropriately configured firewalls; regular

security patches; and intrusion detection and prevention [to prevent VoIP's weakness from being

exploited]," (Stanton 2006). Cao and Malik suggest using Transport Layer Security (TLS) or

Secure Real Time Transport Protocol (SRTP) to secure a connection between end users, but both

have disadvantages. For example, TLS must be established on a hop by hop basis, requires

upgrades to the network, and must have a reliable transport layer. A disadvantage of SRTP is that

the protocol cannot setup encryption keys on its own (Cao and Malik 2005). Connections must

be encrypted so that data cannot be intercepted by an eavesdropper, but this is complicated

because both clients must agree on an encryption method before a secure communication can

exist (McNelly 2007).

According to McNelly, DoS attacks, the biggest vulnerability in a VoIP system, are when

an external person/device floods servers with bogus traffic to prevent legitimate users from

accessing the service. Since VoIP traffic must normally interact with other traffic on the network,

the voice signals will be delayed and potentially deleted if there is congestion on the network.

Theft of service is one of the most costly vulnerabilities of VoIP. An example of this attack could

software running on the data network, which can access the CU voice network to make toll calls.

11

To limit the potential for theft of service, the University must use strict username and password

policies, requiring strong passwords that are changed throughout the year. Further precautions

can also be taken for theft of service to prevent misrepresentation, such as the two factor

authentication, which relies on two methods of authentication. In order to access a soft phone,

two of the following are recommended: something that you know (password), something you

have (USB key), or something that you are (biometrics) (McNelly). Each of these solutions,

however, will have to be installed, configured, maintained, and supported by ITS, increasing the

costs associated with VoIP.

Circuit-switched technology has a high level of security built into the system. If a person

wants to eavesdrop, the eavesdropper needs to gain physical access to CU's transmission

medium. Although protocols exist to increase the security in VoIP networks, vulnerabilities such

as DoS, theft of service, and eavesdropping continue to challenge VoIP. Circuit-switched

networks have a clear advantage over VoIP in terms of security.

Power and Reliability

Power is a very important consideration when implementing a communications system

and people have come to expect service to any traditional landline phone during a power outage.

The survey has shown that 38.3% of our respondents were concerned about the potential loss of

VoIP service during a power outage, making it the second highest VoIP concern. The CU power

infrastructure uses gas turbines to create electricity on campus which have proven to be very

reliable (Mendez Ferreira 2008). The following graph from Victor Mendez Ferreira, a technician

for CU facilities, shows the power availability from 1996 to 2006. The overall average for this

12

time frame is 99.22%1. This percentage of reliability for VoIP does not match the level of five

9’s in a circuit-switched network and results in an average of 19 hours of down time per year.

Figure 3 - CU Cogen Powerhouse - Electricity Availability

Power consumption for VoIP is different than traditional phone services. At CU, the

backup power supply for the entire voice network is housed in the telecommunications building

and can provide an 8-hour backup (Folger 2008). With recent developments in technology, the

concept of supplying power from the network core to end devices is being applied to data

networks by providing devices with DC power over the Ethernet connection, called power over

Ethernet (PoE), or IEEE 802.3af. When implementing VoIP, an uninterrupted power supply

(UPS) is important and must power the switch in case of a power outage. If VoIP is implemented

campus wide, then CU will require UPSs in each telecommunications closet in every building.

The cost for a UPS is around $1,000 and with 600 closets on campus, (Wood-2 2008) an

1 In 1997 the heat recovery steam generator was in a forced outage and unavailable for major repairs resulting in the generation to become unstable for a couple of months. By removing 1997 from the average, the availability is then 99.78%.

13

additional $600,000 worth of equipment is required to keep the VoIP network close in reliability

to the existing PBX. CU has already invested heavily in backup power to the circuit-switched

network (Folger), giving the PBX the advantage over VoIP in regards to power and reliability.

The current data infrastructure does not offer the same reliability that the traditional

PSTN and CU PBX currently provide. David Wood, CU’s ITS administrator, explained that the

data network was down in 2007 for three hours (99.965% availability), whereas the PBX was

only down for ten minutes (Wood-1 2008). This is a major consideration for CU because

someone on campus may need to use a phone during an emergency. If there is an outage on the

data network, then the VoIP network will also go down unless there is adequate backup to the

equipment. As mentioned above, UPSs will need to match the reliability of current circuit-

switched backup equipment. VoIP technology cannot match or exceed the reliability of the PBX,

but can only come close with great costs. Until the costs are reduced for VoIP to match the

reliability of the PBX, ITS should continue using the current circuit-switched technology without

implementing VoIP.

E-911

The University of Colorado is a community of nearly 36,000 people, including 6,000 on-

campus student residents, so safety and preparation for CU must be a priority (University of

Colorado at Boulder n.d.). There have been concerns with the capability of VoIP to offer prompt

and accurate E-911 services. Portable IP phones and PC softphones add to the convenience of the

user, but in turn increase difficulties in updating and maintaining accurate information in the

device location database (Hochmuth 2007).

Traditional circuit-switched networks rely on static switching and geographic location to

provide E-911 services. On the other hand, VoIP is IP based telephony functioning over a local

14

area network and involving dynamic routing, which does not depend on geographic location

(SpectraLink 2003). A wired IP telephone operates over a local area network and does not have a

dedicated physical PBX port and pair of copper wires connecting, which is unlike a circuit-

switched network (SpectraLink). The telephone number and extension of the user do not change

regardless of the location of the user. For instance, although a CU professor travels to Boston for

a conference, the same local extension would be used to reach him in spite of his change in

location. Thus, in times of adds and moves of a user’s VoIP telephone service, CU would require

that the E-911 location database always be updated with current user locations.

Most IP PBX systems today have the capability of updating the local telephone

company’s automatic location identification database the same way as done with traditional

PBXs.

“IP PBX solutions by Avaya, Cisco Systems and others can discover the location of a VoIP device based on the IP subnet, switch location or switch/port location. The assumption is that the network topology is relatively fixed. A [dynamic host configuration protocol] range can be assigned to a specific floor of a building, for instance, and a location is mapped in the IP PBX to VoIP phones in that range. Industry standard protocols, such as the Telecommunications Industry Association extension, Logical Link Discovery Protocol-Media Endpoint Discovery (LLDP-MED), and the IEEE 802.1ab Station and Media Access Control Connectivity Discovery document defines methods for an interconnecting switch to notify the VoIP phone about its location based on the assumption that a particular switch port services a specific location. Cisco's CDP (Cisco Discovery Protocol) provides similar features as LLDP-MED for Cisco equipment” (Fratto 2006). However, since VoIP is a mobile technology, a fully established E-911 service will

require the development of an efficient and accurate emergency responder system which

automatically updates the location database and 911 authorities with the most current location

information of a user (Harvard University n.d.). Until the VoIP technology can achieve CU’s

requirements for a fast, accurate, and reliable E-911 system, a great amount of risk is involved in

15

a VoIP implementation. In a VoIP environment, there is a possibility that the location

information will not be accurate or available to 911 authorities. A single person on campus could

use CU’s emergency services and if authorities cannot promptly respond to the emergency which

results in a tragedy, then CU’s reputation as a safe, public institution of higher learning will be

tarnished.

Proposed VoIP Deployment

If CU were to adopt VoIP technology, the ideal time is when buildings are constructed

from the ground up so that the building can be designed with VoIP in mind, such as extra closet

space, applicable wiring, and an adequate power infrastructure to support VoIP services. This

strategy will reduce the interruption on CU faculty and administration during a future remodel of

a building for a VoIP deployment. Rick Miller from the Department of Education stated that

“one of our business units had the chance to move into a brand new building and consolidate

scattered resources. [The Department of Education] had the opportunity to build their network

infrastructure from scratch without having to replace anything” (Marsan 2003).

In the fall of 2007, demolition of the Sibell Wolle Fine Arts building began to make way

for the new Visual Arts Complex (VAC) directly next to the CU ITS building. The new $63.5

million dollar VAC will cover 170,000 gross square feet, have a permanent art museum, provide

a state of the art building for students and faculty (Besen 2007), and should be considered for a

VoIP deployment. The following is a proposed diagram for a VoIP implementation to the VAC.

16

Figure 4 - Proposed VAC VoIP Deployment

From the proposed VoIP implementation diagram above, voice and data will reside on

the same IP network instead of two separate networks today. In a traditional data network, the

computer is plugged into the Ethernet jack, however in a VoIP network, a PC plugs directly into

the VoIP phone. Voice packets are sent through routers to the VoIP Call Manager, where all

supervision and call processing for the VoIP network takes place. A gateway connects to the Call

Manager and performs the signaling conversion between IP and circuit-switched traffic. With an

evolutionary implementation of VoIP, circuit-switched technology will still be in service. While

the circuit-switched technology is still being used, VoIP does not replace equipment, but rather

requires new equipment like the Call Manager and gateways. When the circuit-switched

technology is completely removed, only then will reduction in hardware be achieved.

17

Costs

Many companies and universities are migrating to VoIP because of potential cost savings

(see Appendix 1). For example, a cost model from a Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) study

found that VoIP would save the school $500,000 annually over retaining their Centrex, not

including the cost of wiring or configuring the current data network for VoIP (Carnegie Mellon

University 2003). The CMU cost model found that the breakeven point after the proposed three-

year migration to VoIP was projected to be four to six years (Carnegie Mellon University). This

section compares the costs for CU to implement VoIP into a new building with continuing to use

the existing circuit-switched technology.

When voice and data reside on the same physical IP network, the increased bandwidth

efficiency can contribute to cost savings by the elimination of copper wiring needed in CU’s

circuit-switched network. In a total VoIP environment, circuit-switched devices like the PBX and

dial-tone generators can be eliminated. Instead, VoIP would use a significantly less expensive

VoIP call manager, which is essentially a software-based voice processing device. CU would

also make use of the existing Cisco data networking equipment. Another example of potential

cost savings is to offer an online account management systems for users to make telephone

changes and thus require less assistance from ITS. A user account could greatly streamline the

current adds, moves, and changes process for telephone services (Wood-2 2008). VoIP does have

a potential for cost savings by integrating the voice and data platforms.

The following table is an estimated analysis for the initial investment costs of a Cisco

VoIP deployment to the VAC. The pricing used is primarily Cisco equipment because costs for

Avaya were not available for the Capstone research. Cisco and Avaya are leaders in VoIP

technology and for the purposes of this Capstone, the assumption is that each brand is

18

comparable in price and quality. One scenario uses 50 low-end Cisco IP phones, the other

scenario has 50 high-end Cisco IP phones, and both have 50 softphones. Note that the equipment

with an asterisk (*) denotes that it is only required to be purchased for the initial VoIP

deployment and not again.

Equipment type Description Quantity Unit Price Total (low-end)

Total (high-end)

IP telephone (low end) Cisco Unified 7906G 50 $180 $9,000 n/a IP telephone (high end) Cisco Unified 7941G-GE 50 $430 n/a $21,500 Softphone CallManager license 50 $20 $1,000 $1,000 *Call Manager software Primary and backup. 2 $18,000 $36,000 $36,000

*IBM server Required for CallManager SW 2 $10,286 $20,572 $20,572

PSTN/VoIP gateway PGW 2200 application 1 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 Sun server Required for GW SW 1 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 *Voice mail Required for VoIP 1 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000

UPS Used to power closet switch 3 $1,000 $3,000 $3,000

*Emergency responder Cisco 1 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 Total $125,572 $138,072

Table 1 - VAC Estimated VoIP Equipment List

As the above data shows, a low-end IP telephone is ten times the cost of a software

license. According to the survey, 54% of faculty and administration felt that replacing their

telephone with a PC softphone would not negatively impact their job functions. This would

result in a relatively lower VoIP deployment cost.

The next table is the estimated cost analysis for if CU were to deploy just circuit-

switched technology to the VAC.

Equipment type Quantity Unit Price Total (low-end) Total (high-end) Digital telephone (low-end) 100 $40 $4,000 n/a Digital telephone (high-end) 100 $150 n/a $15,000 Twisted-pair copper wiring (ft.)2 25,000 $0.203 $5,075 $5,075 Total $9,075 $20,075

Table 2 - VAC Circuit-Switched Equipment List

2 (TESSCO n.d.)

19

The cost increase between CU deploying circuit-switched and the initial VoIP deployment is

about $166,500, including costs for the one-time VoIP equipment purchases.

In 2002, CMU migrated 90 phones from their Centrex to a Cisco VoIP platform for the

Computing Services Department. The school’s main focus of study for the VoIP deployment was

on electricity consumption. The school tested the electricity consumption of a Cisco 7960 IP

telephone which averaged 5.5 to 6.5 watts when powered from a wall outlet (Chong and

Matthews 2004). However, when a Cisco Catalyst 3524 switch powered the IP phone with PoE,

then 11.625 watts per IP phone was required (Chong and Matthews).The existing Meridian

digital phones averaged only 1.5 watts, while analog phones receive power directly from the

PBX and need no local power (Chong and Matthews).

The following calculations were used to determine the approximate increase in electricity

consumption costs for a VoIP deployment to the VAC. According to CMU, each Cisco PoE IP

phone requires 0.011625 kW, which multiplied by 8,760 hours in a year equals 101.835 kWh. At

$0.056 per kWh for 50 IP phones, the total annual electricity consumption for IP phones in the

VAC would be $285.14. In comparison, 50 digital Meridian phones would require only $36.80

for annual electricity consumption.

The following table splits the VoIP deployment costs into specific cost categories. The

total of $181,857 is the cost of CU implementing VoIP from the ground up without any prior

VoIP technology in place. The next total for $115,300 is if CU only purchases the equipment

needed to enable the IP functionality of the current Avaya PBX. The last two scenarios compare

implementing VoIP and a circuit-switched network over their respective existing platforms. As

the table shows, the deployment costs for a VoIP network are over twice the cost of a similar

circuit-switched deployment.

20

Expense Cost Software $66,000 Hardware $58,572 Licensing $57,000 Electricity $285 Total $181,857 Hybrid PBX functionality $115,300 Existing VoIP infrastructure $19,300 Existing circuit-switched $9,112

Table 3 - Total Costs for VAC VoIP Deployment

The ITS department is not funded by the state of Colorado, but instead charges CU

departments for phone services and usage. In order for ITS to cover the increased deployment

costs related to a VoIP deployment, charges to the departments will have to increase (Folger

2008). Adopting the VoIP technology into a voice network that works very well today will

require a large initial investment, increasing departmental charges.

User Section

This section focuses on the features that are currently available to a CU user through the

current Avaya PBX and what could be offered under a VoIP environment. The possible features

are then compared to the results of the survey from CU users. This section then concludes with a

recommendation to ITS.

Avaya PBX Features

The following section was gathered from the Avaya Call Manager support

documentation. The Avaya PBX circuit-switched capabilities offers operator services, an

enhanced call center feature, and other standard telephony services like call waiting, caller id,

and call forwarding. The Avaya Communication Manager (ACM) only allows for three-party

conferencing unless assisted by an operator. Six-party conferences are possible but only through

the use of a multi-appearance telephone which can bridge calls together. The ACM allows users

21

to set up a call-in number where up to six parties can call a specific number to create a

conference.

The current PBX is hybrid because it has both circuit-switched and VoIP functionality.

When configured for IP, users can establish audio and video conferencing. Using a PC

softphone, a CU user could make a call, receive calls, conference, transfer, hold, access a call

history, send instant messages using session internet protocol, and more. Caller ID information

with name and number can be sent from a local exchange carrier and accepted by the IP PBX

and ACM user. This functionality does not exist in today’s environment where ITS has only

enabled the ACM’s circuit-switched capability.

An ACM IP phone can be configured to ring distinctively on certain types of calls, for

example, to distinguish between internal and external callers. Personalized rings can be assigned

to different telephone numbers in a shared office environment as a way to identify which

employee the incoming call is for (Avaya Corporation 2004).

Another tool mentioned earlier that the faculty could use is an online account

management system where the individual could make account changes without calling a

helpdesk or creating trouble tickets for ITS to configure different settings. This would save ITS

money and free the time of ITS personnel.

Survey Features

Based on the Capstone survey results, CU faculty and administration are willing to use

VoIP applications such as multimedia conferencing, web based tools, and enhanced telephone

features (see Capstone survey in Appendix). In all three VoIP technology categories, over 50%

responded likely or very likely to use these enhanced IP features if available (see Figure 8). If the

respondents were to use these enhanced features, then there is potential that they could become

22

more efficient, For example, Intel conducted a VoIP pilot program and reported increased

productivity by 2.7 days per user, per year (Sacker, Santaiti and Spence 2006).

Figure 5 - VoIP Feature Demand

When the faculty and administrators were asked about their satisfaction with the current

voice system, 88.18% said that they were neutral to very satisfied. Another relevant finding was

the amount of time the respondents spent talking on a CU phone. Eighty-two percent of

respondents said that they talk on the phone less than one hour per day.

How satisfied are you with CU’s current voice system (telephone, voicemail, fax)?

During a typical business day, how long do you spend talking on CU campus telephones?

Very Satisfied 29 8.79% Less than 1 hour 272 82.42% Satisfied 137 41.52% 1 hour – 2 hours 40 12.12% Neutral 125 37.88% 2 hours – 3 hours 16 4.85% Dissatisfied 32 9.70% 3 hours – 4 hours 0 0.00% Very Dissatisfied 7 2.12% 4+ hours 2 0.61%

Table 4 - User Survey Results

23

These two survey responses show that the faculty and administration do not use the phone very

often and when they do, users are generally satisfied with the current system. The Intel efficiency

case would not apply to CU’s situation because of the low amount of telephone usage.

VoIP would be a big investment to replace the current system that works well in order to

add a few more features. If CU faculty and administration are not using the phone system very

often, then a logical solution is to upgrade the current PBX with more features instead of

adopting a new voice platform. The Avaya PBX can be upgraded to provide some of the features

that CU respondents want, such as web-based voice mail and device mobility. The major

complaint from the respondents was dissatisfaction with the current voicemail system, so ITS

could purchase a new voicemail system for $10,000 (Folger 2008). This hybrid voice mail

system will work in a circuit-switched and VoIP environment to perform all of the normal

voicemail functions, along with enhancements such as web-based functionality where voice

messages can be listened to or converted to text and read.

From the low telephone usage and high satisfaction of CU’s current network, there is no

compelling argument to convert the existing and well working circuit-switched equipment to

VoIP if additional features can be added to the PBX.

Other Universities With VoIP Implementation

This Capstone can be applied to other similarly sized universities with an existing circuit-

switched infrastructure. Many universities around the country are faced with the same issues in

deciding to join the current trend and implement VoIP. In some cases, VoIP can offer enhanced

features that can increase productivity and reduce costs. This may not be true in all situations for

universities. Other cost considerations need to be accounted for in order to have the same

reliability and quality of the current circuit-switched technology.

24

Some universities have implemented VoIP successfully. The University of Arkansas at

Pine Bluff implemented softphone VoIP technology to save considerable money on long distance

charges and to replace the obsolete PBX (Villano 2007). Brigham Young University (BYU) was

in the same situation when its circuit-switched PBX became obsolete and its telecommunications

building was planned for demolition. BYU decided to invest money into a campus wide VoIP

system. According to Steve Carlson (2008), BYU’s Information Technology Product Manager,

BYU had problems implementing VoIP with defective hardware. He mentioned that the true cost

savings for BYU would come with the reduction in long distance charges, which they currently

have not changed (Carlson 2008). These two cases are examples of universities with different

situations than CU, where the PBX equipment became obsolete or implemented VoIP for the

sole purpose of reducing long distance costs. The University of Colorado already has an

inexpensive long distance agreement (2 cents a minutes) and is planning to remove phones in the

resident halls on campus because of the minimal use of long distance calls by students (Wood-1

2008). The University of Colorado is not in the same situation as BYU or Arkansas, and lacks

any compelling reason to implement VoIP.

Future Considerations for CU

There is no compelling argument for CU or other similar universities to implement VoIP

today, however there will be an opportune time for each university to adopt VoIP. For example,

the most recent upgrade to CU’s Avaya PBX was paid for with a bond, which ITS expects to

have paid off in June, 2008 (Keyek-Franssen, et al. 2006). Since the bond will be paid for, ITS

can set aside the budgeted money used to pay the bond and invest in CU’s next generation of

voice services. The evolution to VoIP should begin when the maintenance costs for the PBX

eventually exceed the cost of adopting VoIP into CU’s network.

25

Over the next three to five years, CU will increase the potential for more IP telephony

services within the CU campus. Currently, an ongoing project on the CU campus called CU

Rewire has upgraded 80% of the campus with a modern network of CAT5e wiring and 50% of

PoE switches, allowing data speeds of 100 Mbps to every Ethernet jack in CU’s general funded

buildings (University of Colorado n.d.). All switches (VoIP capable) will be upgraded to allow

for more capabilities, greater QoS, and security features (Wood-2 2008). A future VoIP

implementation will require the ITS department to address the VoIP technology concerns

discussed above, research the services supported by different VoIP vendors, and perform a

detailed return on investment analysis.

Conclusion

There are numerous benefits of implementing VoIP within CU’s private network. One

major benefit is that CU faculty and staff will have access to enhanced IP features and a

reduction in costs. The Capstone survey suggests that the majority of CU’s voice network users

want to use applications such as multimedia conferencing, web based tools, and enhanced phone

features.

Though VoIP can offer better features than the current PBX, there are some tradeoffs

because deploying a VoIP network with adequate QoS, security, reliability in power outages, and

E-911 capabilities will not be an easy task. These problems can be addressed for CU’s network

but only at a high cost, required expert networking techniques, and choosing the right VoIP

equipment. Deploying a new VoIP network will be very expensive and the major benefit will be

the addition of new features for the faculty, therefore ITS should add on these enhanced features

to the current circuit-switched PBX.

26

The University’s existing circuit-switched network will eventually need to evolve into a

VoIP environment as the older equipment’s lifespan ends. Maintenance costs will eventually rise

to a point where it is greater than the cost of implementing a new generation of voice network, at

which point it will be an ideal time to transition to VoIP technology.

In the initial stages of the Capstone, our first assumption was the University could save

considerable costs and provide the faculty with enhanced phone features by implementing VoIP

campus wide. Further research proved that this conclusion was premature. When the scope of the

project was scaled down to only a part of the campus certain practical concerns arose. A VoIP

implementation is best applied only to new buildings, however, the Capstone concluded that

even this is not economically justified for CU at this time.

This Capstone concludes that if the VoIP network is designed keeping in mind the

required security, QoS, and power requirements, then ITS can create a scalable voice

communications network over a data network. However, although a VoIP network can be

created from existing technologies, it is not feasible at this time for similar universities to adopt

the VoIP technology. The benefits of a VoIP network are not significant enough to merit the

investment of time, labor, and finances required for such a project at CU. Based on our analysis

of VoIP concerns, deployment costs, current usage of phone services, and user satisfaction, the

Capstone group is convinced that CU must continue using the current circuit-switched

technology.

27

Works Cited

Avaya Corporation. "Overview for Avaya Communication Manager." Avaya Support . 2004. http://support.avaya.com/elmodocs2/comm_mgr/r2_1/pdfs/233767_6.pdf (accessed April 1, 2008).

Besen, Linda. "Goodbye Sibell Wolle, Hello Visual Arts Complex." Inside CU. October 9, 2007. http://www.colorado.edu/insidecu/editions/2007/10-9/story2.html (accessed January 29, 2008).

Cao, Feng, and Saadat Malik. "Security Analysis and Solutions for Deploying IP Telephony in the Critical Infrastructure." IEEE, 2005: 171-180.

Carlson, Steve, interview by Daubendiek. Interview with Brigham Young University, OIT Product Manager (April 15, 2008).

Carnegie Mellon University. "Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) Project." CMU Computing Services. June 25, 2003. (accessed February 2, 2008).

Chong, Hui M, and H. S. Matthews. "Comparative Analysis of Traditional Telephone and VoIP Systems." IEEE, 2004: 106-111.

Collins, Daniel. Carrier Grade Voice Over IP, 2nd Ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2003. DMR Communications. "VoIP Phone Systems Potential Drawbacks." DMR Communications.

http://www.dmrcom.net/voip.html?page=voipdrawbacks (accessed March 7, 2008). Folger, Jane, interview by Ethan Chambers, Jamie Daubendiek, Kanu Gupta, Brian McNelly

and Monika Parulekar. Campus PBX Tour (February 21, 2008). Fratto, Mike. "E911 for VoIP ." Networking Computing by TechWeb. October 5, 2006.

http://www.networkcomputing.com/channels/networkinfrastructure/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=193005690 (accessed March 23, 2008).

Harvard University. "Harvard University VOIP Service Offering ." University Information Systems. http://www.uis.harvard.edu/emerging_technologies/voiceoverip/servicesdesc.php (accessed March 28, 2008).

Hedge, Manju, and Mort Naraghi-Pour. "Finally, End-to-End Qos. - MPLS Multiprotocol Label Switching - Technical." BNET Business Network. October 2001. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0TLC/is_10_35/ai_79251315 (accessed March 23, 2008).

Hochmuth, Phil. "Six Burning VoIP Questions." PC World. October 8, 2007. http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/138147-3/six_burning_voip_questions.html (accessed March 15, 2008).

Keyek-Franssen, Deborah, Dennis Maloney, Robert Schnabel, and Marin Stanek. Vice Provost for Academic & Campus Technology. Boulder: University of Colorado, 2006.

Marsan, Carolyn. "Early adopter shares VoIP lessons learned." ARN. January 22, 2003. http://www.arnnet.com.au/index.php/id;1407889962;fp;4194304;fpid;1 (accessed November 12, 2007).

McNelly, Brian. VoIP Security Vulerabilities. Boulder, December 6, 2007. Mendez Ferreira, Victor O., interview by Jamie Daubendiek. CU Power Facility Technician

(March 25, 2008). Miller, Rick. "Early Adopter Shares VoIP Lessons Learned." ARN. January 22, 2003.

http://www.arnnet.com.au/index.php/id;1407889962;fp;4194304;fpid;1 (accessed November 16, 2007).

28

Sacker, Stephen M., Matthew Santaiti, and Catherine Spence. "The Business Case for Enterprise VoIP." Intel Corporation. February 2006. http://intel.com/it/pdf/parsippany-voip.pdf (accessed April 6, 2008).

SpectraLink Corporation. "E-911 Compatibility of SpectraLink Wireless." Spectralink and Polycom. 2003. http://www.spectralink.com/files/literature/E-911.pdf (accessed March 24, 2008).

Stanton, Ray. "Secure VoIP - an achievable goal." Computer Fraud & Security, 2006: 11-14. TESSCO. "Twisted Pair Cables [404-38]." Tessco Home Page.

http://www.tessco.com/products/displayProducts.do?groupId=404&subgroupId=38 (accessed March 23, 2008).

University of Colorado at Boulder. "Just the Facts." University of Colorado. http://www.colorado.edu/news/facts/fastfacts/index.html (accessed Apeil 18, 2008).

University of Colorado. "CU-Boulder Network Rewire." Information Technology Services. www.colorado.edu/its/networking/rewire (accessed February 10, 2008).

Unuth, Nadeem. "VoIP Cons - VoIP Problems and Pitfalls." About.com. http://voip.about.com/od/voipbasics/a/voipproblems.htm (accessed March 10, 2008).

Valdes, Jr., Jose J., interview by Daubendiek. Interview with Colorado State University Associate Director for Telecommunications (March 24, 2008).

Villano, Matt. "Telecommunications -- VoIP is Victory." Campus Telecommunications. May 27, 2007. http://campustechnology.com/articles/40285/ (accessed March 30, 2008).

Wood, David, interview by Jamie Daubendiek, Kanu Gupta and Brian McNelly. First ITS Interview - VoIP (January 25, 2008).

Wood, David, interview by Ethan Chambers, Kanu Gupta and Monika Parulekar. Second CU ITS Interview (March 26, 2008).

29

Appendix

Appendix 1 - VoIP Market Trend

University of Colorado Faculty and Administration Survey

Using CU's online directories, our team identified e-mail addresses to individuals from

various departments. The 20-question survey was web-based and distributed to 1,142 CU

faculty, administration and staff. The survey had 340 people respond, or 20.9%(29.8%?) of the

total sample size. To increase our population further, an advertisement was placed in a CU

faculty-wide e-mail bulletin, which added an additional 101 responses.

30

Current Telecommunications Usage and Needs of CU Faculty and Administration

1. Are you a

Student Employee

Administrator

IT professional

Professor

Other faculty member

Response Percent

16.3%

22.2%

3.3%

32.8%

25.4%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

55

75

11

111

86

338

0

2. What department do you work for?

Administration

Architecture and Planning, College of

Arts and Sciences, College of

Business, Leeds School of

Education, School of

Engineering and Applied Science,

Collage of

Journalism and Mass Communication, School of

Law, School of

Music, College of

Housing

Other (please specify)

Response Percent

4.0%

Response Count

13

0.3% 1

28.5%

6.2%

6.5%

92 20 21

27.2% 88

0.3% 1

7.1%

5.6%

0.9%

13.3%

answered question

23

18

3

43 323

Page 1

31

skipped question 15

3. How satisfied are you with CU's current telecommunications system (telephone, voicemail, fax)?

1 Very Satisfied

2 Satisfied

3 Neutral

4 Dissatisfied

5 Very Dissatisfied

Response Percent

9.1%

41.5%

37.6%

9.7%

2.1%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

30

137

124

32

7

330

8

4. During a typical business day, how long do you spend talking on CU campus telephones?

Less than 1 hour

1 hour - 2 hours

2 hours - 3 hours

3 hours - 4 hours

4+ hours

Response Percent

82.5%

11.8%

4.8%

0.3%

0.6%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

273

39

16

1

2

331

7

Page 2

32

5. What percentage of your business telephone calls are within the CU campus extensions?

None

1-24%

25-50%

51-75%

Greater than 75%

Response Percent

7.0%

33.0%

26.1%

21.2%

12.7%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

23

109

86

70

42

330

8

6. What percentage of your business telephone calls are within the local area codes (303 and 720)?

None

1-24%

25-50%

51-75%

Greater than 75%

Response Percent

4.3%

31.9%

23.7%

15.5%

24.6%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

14

105

78

51

81

329

9

Page 3

33

7. What percentage of your business telephone calls are outside the local area codes? This is where you may need to enter a long distance code.

None

1-24%

25-50%

51-75%

Greater than 75%

Response Percent

7.9%

53.2%

20.8%

12.7%

5.4%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

26

176

69

42

18

331

7

8. Have you ever used Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) for telephone communication? Examples include Vonage IP telephone or VoIP applications such as Skype and Gtalk.

Yes

No

Don't know

Response Percent

45.5%

52.1%

2.4%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

151

173

8

332

6

9. What type of VoIP technology did you use?

IP phone (Example: Vonage)

Softphone (Example: Skype, Gtalk)

Both

Response Percent

17.8%

69.2%

13.0%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

26

101

19

146

192

Page 4

34

10. Rate your experience with using VoIP on a scale of 1-5? (1 = very satisfied, 5 = very dissatisfied)

1 Very satisfied

2 Satisfied

3 Neutral

4 Dissatisfied

5 Very dissatisfied

Response Percent

18.8%

49.0%

18.1%

12.8%

1.3%

Additional comments (1000 character max)

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

28

73

27

19

2

48

149

189

11. How likely are you to use multimedia conferencing, such as video or whiteboard conferencing, if it was available at CU? (1 = very likely, 5 = very unlikely)

1 Very likely

2 Likely

3 Neutral

4 Unlikely

5 Very unlikely

Response Percent

19.6%

33.1%

20.2%

14.1%

12.9%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

64

108

66

46

42

326

12

Page 5

35

12. How likely are you to use web based tools such as downloadable ringtones, web/email access to voice mail, or online account management, if they were available at CU? (1 = very likely, 5 = very unlikely)

1 Very likely

2 Likely

3 Neutral

4 Unlikely

5 Very unlikely

Response Percent

18.1%

37.4%

18.7%

16.6%

9.2%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

59

122

61

54

30

326

12

13. How likely are you to use enhanced phone features such as address book, caller ID w/ name, call history, or multiple numbers for one device, if they were offered for use at CU? (1 = very likely, 5 = very unlikely)

1 Very likely

2 Likely

3 Neutral

4 Unlikely

5 Very unlikely

Response Percent

30.1%

34.7%

16.6%

12.0%

6.7%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

98

113

54

39

22

326

12

Page 6

36

14. If the following telephone features were available to use at CU, how likely would you use them?

Very likely Likely Neutral Somewhat

unlikely Very

unlikely Rating

Average Response

Count

Incoming/outgoing fax from PC 38.8% (124)

30.6% (98)

13.4% (43)

10.3% (33) 6.9% (22) 2.16 320

Ability to use your telephone number on any computer or telephone within

the campus network.

Calling a single telephone number to ring multiple devices until the user

is found

22.8% (74)

32.4% (105)

26.9% (87)

10.2% (33) 7.7% (25) 2.48 324

12.3% (40)

25.6% (83)

30.9% (100)

17.9% (58) 13.3%

(43) 2.94 324

Please list additional features not mentioned above that you would like in CU's next generation telecommunications system

answered question

skipped question

48

326

12

15. Would you be willing to attend a training session (e.g. 1 hour) to learn how to use some of the advanced phone features listed above?

Yes

No

Response Percent

66.8%

33.2%

If no, why?

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

217

108

100

325

13

Page 7

37

16. If VoIP is implemented, would you be concerned that any of the following might negatively impact your communication experience? Check all that apply.

Response Percent

Response Count

Ability to locate caller using 911 service

Loss of service during power

outages

Complex feature setup

Complex features

Voice quality

Security vulnerabilities over IP networks

Availability of telephone service

None

Other (please specify)

20.6% 66

38.3% 123

33.0% 26.8% 48.9%

106

86 157

28.3% 91

30.8%

17.1%

5.9%

answered question

skipped question

99

55

19 321

17

17. Are you willing to use a software-based telephone with a headset connected to your computer in place of your traditional telephone.

1 Yes 2 No

3 Neutral

Response Percent

54.6%

19.9%

25.5%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

178

65

83

326

12

Page 8

38

18. Do you own a cell phone ?

Yes

No

Response Percent

90.2%

9.8%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

294

32

326

12

19. What cell phone provider do you use?

Verizon

Sprint/Nextel

AT&T

T-Mobile

Cricket

Virgin Mobile

Other (please specify)

Response Percent

37.8%

11.6%

23.1%

19.7%

0.3%

0.7%

6.8%

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

111

34

68

58

1

2

20

294

44

20. Based on signal quality/strength and dropped calls, can you place calls from your cellular phone in your office?

Response Percent

All the time

Sometimes

Never

73.1%

23.8%

3.1% answered question

skipped question

Response Count

215

70

9

294

44

Page 9

39

21. Please enter your e-mail address to be entered in the $50 cash prize drawing.

answered question

skipped question

Response Count

300

300

38

Page 10