Operator Connect has been generally well received in the market since its launch last year , giving businesses a third option to plug voice into Microsoft Teams.
But, despite its global reach and the amount of publicity it has received, there are a few misconceptions floating around the market which are creating unnecessary barriers for companies considering adoption.
Ian Guest, Marketing Director at Pure IP, has talked UC Today through some of these misconceptions and explained why, for the most part, they are not valid.
“It’s Not Reliable”
Despite only becoming generally available in September, Operator Connect has actually been in use by customers since it went into public preview back in May 2021.
The product was functional during this time, but Microsoft was open about the fact that it was still in development.
This may have played a part in talk of Operator Connect being unreliable, Guest said.
He explained that, as expected, Microsoft was still making changes to the service while it was in public preview, although these changes had a minimal impact on users.
“There was a time when Microsoft was changing things because they were still developing the product, but these only affected the operator – not the customer. The platform has been stable since moving into general availability, and we have over 90 organisations already using Operator Connect.”
“It’s Not Secure (or Not as Secure as Direct Routing)”
Guest said that he’s heard chatter about Operator Connect not providing adequate protection for businesses, which he said is not the case because of how carriers’ services are connected into the Teams and the Microsoft network.
“Teams already has good built-in security, and with Operator Connect, voice traffic is run through a trusted cross-connect directly with Microsoft . That means that calls perform fewer hops between the customer network, carrier, and Microsoft, and avoid passing through the public internet as much as possible”
“All of the carriers on Operator Connect must have their networks set up in a secure way because they wouldn’t be able to connect to Microsoft’s network if they hadn’t done so.”
Guest also pointed out that a Direct Routing solution should be as secure as Operator Connect, if configured properly.
“It Will Cost More Than Direct Routing”
This could be true, but only because the decision on pricing comes down to each individual Operator Connect-approved carrier, and isn’t mandated by Microsoft.
Guest said that Pure IP, however, charges the same for Operator Connect as it does for Direct Routing, but added that businesses will likely save money with Operator Connect because it is easier to configure and may not require the same level of professional services to deploy.
The cost effectiveness is also closely linked to another Operator Connect rumour in circulation: that customers need to purchase hardware as part of the solution.
This is not the case, because the SBC is managed by the carrier, rather than the customer themselves or a third-party provider.
“The Migration is a Nightmare”
While it is true that elements of the migration can be complex, it is certainly not impossible, and any issues that arise are unlikely to be the fault of the Operator Connect platform.
Guest said that migrating from a legacy platform to Teams and Operator Connect for the first time is relatively simple, but added that moving numbers from another Microsoft voice service – such as Calling Plans or Direct Routing – needs to be managed carefully.
“I think some of the misinformation about Operator Connect could stem from some of the challenges that people are experiencing around the migration,” he explained.
“People that have been migrating without the knowledge and experience of how to do it properly have been running into a few problems – but the migration doesn’t fail if it is carried out professionally”
from UC Today https://ift.tt/PSNLYxqyT
0 Comments