Share your experience using Ribbon Session Border Controllers

Oracle SBC is like a gatekeeper for voice calls. It helps connect different phone networks and systems, making sure calls get where they need to go safely and smoothly.

The best thing about the Oracle SBC is its flexibility to work with various PBX systems and communication platforms like Cisco, Genesys, and Microsoft Teams. It is valuable because it can adapt to different setups, making it easier to integrate into existing systems.

One area for improvement with Oracle SBC is its complexity, which can make it challenging for non-technical users to manage effectively. It requires a high level of technical expertise to understand and manage the device efficiently. Simplifying the user interface and providing more user-friendly management tools could help make it more accessible to a wider range of users.

I would like to add a more user-friendly interface to Oracle SBC, with a focus on GUI-based management to simplify operations for end users and clients.

I have been working with Oracle SBC for two years.

Oracle SBC is generally stable. Its flexibility allows for easy modifications to meet specific requirements, reducing turnaround time and ensuring smooth operation.

Oracle SBC is scalable, but it has limitations based on the product version and model. Some versions have specified limits on the number of sessions. However, for the user's specific use case, the product used was stable.

In my company, we have around three to four sites for our clients, each with around four SBCs. So, approximately five to ten people are managing the SBCs.

The initial installation of Oracle SBC can be relatively straightforward for experienced users but may pose challenges for clients who are less familiar with the technical aspects. Configuring the SBC itself is manageable, but clients often struggle to understand the setup process and the reasons behind it. Simplifying the setup process and providing clearer guidance could help reduce these challenges for end users. Training resources are scarce in comparison to Cisco devices, with few options available on public platforms for users to access and learn from.

The pricing for Oracle SBC is fair and reflects the quality and brand reputation associated with Oracle.

My company chose Oracle SBC primarily to migrate from traditional PRI lines to SIP channels. SBCs offered more scalability and reduced hardware costs compared to PRI lines. Oracle was selected as the preferred solution for this migration.

I would recommend considering Oracle SBC, but be prepared to invest in skilled resources for implementation and maintenance.

Overall, I would rate Oracle SBC as an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for connecting to the service provider for solutions services and enterprise and service customers. It allows customers to connect their end customers to their core systems. The solution is deployed on-premises and on cloud, depending on the project.

This solution has assisted with interpretability, security hardening and protection services.

The security, topology, and hiding features have been most valuable as these security management features assist in hiding and defending our core systems.

It is tough to find a negative point for this software because it is state-of-the-art software. However, it could have more stability.

We have been using this solution for 15 years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. However, it's hard to state the exact number of people using the software in the organization because it's not software that end customers use. It is used for providing voice telephone service, and the whole company uses it indirectly when making phone calls. Therefore, everyone from the seal level to the technician uses it in the organization. Two to three people are required for deployment and maintenance.

I rate my experience with customer service and support an eight out of ten.

Positive

We evaluated a couple of other alternative solutions, but we chose to keep working with this solution.

The initial setup was straightforward. I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten. The deployment time depends on the project, but it could range from one day to 60 days for full integration. Integrating any components is much more complex with a service provider.

We implemented it in-house.

From my perspective, there are no additional costs once the solution is live. This is beneficial because it works well and it's steady. Therefore, I rate the return on investment a ten out of ten.

The licensing costs depend on the cases and the features, so I cannot give a specific price. However, from a licensing perspective, it is affordable compared to competitors.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. The solution is like a Swiss Army knife and it is clean and straightforward, but there could be more stability on the platform.