Centrex with PBX?

[ianhenn]

Hello All,

I am a computer guy learning my employers Strata DK280 PBX system, but at the risk of asking some stupid questions I am in need of some answers to questions to which I haven't found answers.

Our PBX system has a dedicated T1 line, but also has six CO lines. On the phone bill, these six CO lines have Centrex packages. Is this right? I keep reading the Centrex is for people that don't have their own PBX equipment. Is it right to have CO lines and a dedicated T1 line?

Also, we have three dedicated fax lines with Centrex service and one without. I don't understand why a fax line needs Centrex service. At $35.85 per fax line for Centrex support vs. the other billed at $.44, I would love to verify if this is correct.

Thank you for your help!
Ian

 

[aastratech]

Ian,

hope this helps a little, any other input appreciated:

the 6 centrex lines on the PBX are not serving any purpose unless you have other sites with some centrex lines also and this reason would be for simple call transfer etc...if you dont i would suggect these are ceased and converted to normal CO lines.

with the fax lines centrex maybe being used as caller busy divert to the other fax numbers, again if you dont require this type of service have them converted and save on the costs..

MDEVO

 

[LkEErie]

Centrex lines also bundle features. In our area, "custopak" comes with Caller ID, Call Forwarding, Unsupervised Call Transfer, and a few other features at one "low" price, which is less expensive than a C.O. line with those features added. It also locks in a rate for some amount of time (2,3,5 or 7 years). In fact, IIRC you can't get unsupervised call transfer without centrex, by tariff. Go figure.

The extra $11.19 poor and downtrodden fee and "connection fee" still apply to both exchange and centrex lines.

As you pointed out, the $44 vs $35.85 is still $8 a month savings per line. Over 10 lines, that's nearly $1000 per year.

LkEErie

 

[donb01]

Back when I ran into this problem at one of my clinics many moons ago when installing a PBX I got some horse hockey from AT&T when I tried to convert the lines to regular loop start or ground start lines that "Those numbers were built for Centrex and couldn't be converted". So if I wanted to keep the same numbers I had to keep the centrex lines. Mine were way more expensive though - up in the $50's.

I don't know if in these days of number portability they can still refuse to migrate numbers from one type of line to another, or if things changed and it can be done now, but that might be another hurdle they toss out at you once you make a decision....

 

[kwbMitel]

It was quite common "In the Day" to have both analog and digital lines. The digital lines have a weakness where you could lose all of your telco services at once. Many companies retained analog lines for "Backup". The reliability of T1's is very high and if you can live without any phone service if/when the T1 fails then the analog lines are just a drain on your finances. If you cannot live without phone service the analog lines are your insurance.

As to why they're centrex, centrex was probably cheaper than 6 equivelent lines at the time they were installed. This may no longer be the case but that is irrevelent.

*******************************************************
Occam's Razor - All things being equal, the simplest solution is the right one.

 

[cwc3]

6 centrex lines are usually cheaper then 6 B1 lines
and they do serve a purpose unsupervised transfer off net
for those of us that don't have networked telephone systems

 

[Delster]

One reason for installing extensions from one PBX as a trunk onto another is to allow calls to be routed through those circuits to external destinations without the external call tarriff.

One thing to do would be to to check the routing tables (or equivalent on that PBX) to see if the PBX forces calls to certain numbers over that group of trunks.

Also check for an access code that send calls over those trunks and run a usage trace...that'll tell you where those calls tend to go.

Hope that helps

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
umm,it IS supposed to do that, right??

 

[ianhenn]

Thank you everyone for your input. I greatly appreciate it.

 

[kwbMitel]

irrevelent???

Irrelevent, man I've got to work on my spelling.

*******************************************************
Occam's Razor - All things being equal, the simplest solution is the right one.

 

[stsguy]

are you canadian?

 

[kwbMitel]

Actually I am.

Is it revelant?

*******************************************************
Occam's Razor - All things being equal, the simplest solution is the right one.

 

[cwc3]

That explains everything !