Hi,
There’s any plan to a routerboard have SIP port integrated and the possibility to configure it through routerOS?
Thanks.
What do you mean by this?
To avoid using external voip adapter to users and the phone configuration integrated to mikrotik router, only 1 hardware
You mean “FXS” port, not SIP port. FXS is the side of an analog line that delivers dial-tone and ring voltage, etc. SIP (for call signalling; RTP is for the actual audio) is the protocol that (most) VoIP services speak over IP. But there are many protocols other than SIP that a “VoIP-to-analog adapter” with such a port might speak on the IP side: IAX2, MGCP, H.323, etc.
I very much doubt we will see anything like this on MT hardware anytime soon. It would require extensive changes and whole feature additions to ROS. Implementing a SIP+RTP client is no small feat, and MikroTik has many larger fish to fry before they start attacking that problem.
Not that I wouldn’t welcome it…just being realistic.
– Nathan
I find the Siemens Gigaset VOIP phones very good once you change away from the analog lines.
http://www.gigaset.com/hq_en/telephones/voip-phones/
For the record, if a modem/router is going to have a “VoIP” combination built into it that combination is going to be based on SIP. Both the MGCP and H.323 protocols are “high end” setups that require Gateways and Controllers and then the user’s endpoints. Additionally, IAX2 is an Asterisk specific protocol. There are maybe a handful of other systems that support it, FreeSWITCH would be one (and the only other I know of). SIP won the “VoIP Wars” as far as becoming the industry standard about a decade ago.
Also, let’s be honest with this. The need for a Router/VoIP combo is a Residential Service need and looking at the market you will see companies like Netgear, D-Link, etc do have solutions for this but then again, they are geared to Residential consumers. Mikrotik’s are not geared to the average home user. They are not marketing to those that shop in big box stores like Best Buy, Staples or their global counterparts.
So I agree with the fact I don’t think this will be something Mikrotik does in the near future. Not without some major (large) ISP/Telco/Carrier dropping some serious coin on the table and asking Mikrotik to design them a new “all-in-one” model. Then again, with so many other options already available for those companies to use I just don’t see this happening anytime soon.
`
Oh, for sure. The main point is that you don’t call an analog T/R voice jack a “SIP port”. 
If this feature were to ever appear on a RouterBoard, though, protocol support would end up being driven by the needs of the operators. It’s not unheard of for, say, cable operators to use MGCP, especially since that’s the protocol that the original PacketCable spec standardized on; SIP didn’t show up as an option until PC 2.0. As a result, most deployed cable modems with integrated media gateways speak MGCP. Of course, I’d wager that the vast majority of operators that deploy MT devices would probably use and want SIP, and although I can’t think of a good reason for wanting to use something else, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t good reasons that others might have for using something else on their own networks, and I wouldn’t want to discount those reasons. (There’s also the still-theoretical “SIP 3.0” future awaiting us, etc…“other signaling protocols” could easily encompass whatever current SIP evolves into years down the road.) Adding support for other signaling mechanisms is “easy” enough to do in software updates at a later date should it ever prove necessary; the analog interface doesn’t know or care what’s happening on the back-end and the hardware isn’t going to impose a SIP-specific design on the software.
Also, as for the “MT doesn’t cater to residential market” stuff, even if we said that’s true for the sake of argument, MT would not be building router+ATA combo devices for individual unit sales to residential consumers. The sales of such devices would be to the ISPs that want to use RouterBoards as CPE, and want a voice jack integrated into it. That is to say, the customer for such a device is the ISP, not the end-user. There are many such ISPs out there, so I would say that as a product, it makes sense, even if it is not sold through shrinkwrap / direct-to-consumer sales channels. Besides, I don’t know if you’ve noticed this, but most of the router+ATAs that exist out there manufactured by the “usual suspects” (Netgear, Linksys, D-Link, etc.) are also not sold direct-to-consumer, either, unlike their standalone router products! Most of those router+ATAs are both commissioned and purchased wholesale either by ISPs or by VoIP providers, and as a residential VoIP customer, you can’t (always) pick one of these up at Walmart or whatever, and when you do get one, the voice side of the thing is typically locked down so that it only works with a particular voice provider (the one you sourced it from)!
So whether MT does this in the future is likely going to come down to: 1) whether there is high enough demand for it from their customers (the ISPs), and 2) how much work it would be on the software side to integrate a VoIP endpoint into RouterOS in a way that makes sense (from a configuration & provisioning perspective) and whether MT has enough interest in pursuing that & can justify it.
– Nathan
I am an ISP and I would love a device that had built in FXS ports (at least 2!). It would be critical these ports are supported by FreePBX software. There are many devices out there like the cambium R201P but they are not supported by FreePBX.directly (they work but you have to chose some random ATA config that works, not listed directly). The perfect feature list for me would be:
its a Router
with 2.4G WiFi
with 5G WiFi
With 2 ATA FXS ports (and potentially a 4 port version)
Wan port (would be really nice to have a second WAN port and support failover like netgear SRX5308)
4 LAN ports (with at least 1 supporting PoE)
would be great if it supported RIP and/or BGP
External power supply (so we could run the device off 12V/24V batteries)
Optionally, support being powered by PoE (via a WAN port) then we wouldnt need local batteries
have models that support SFP (fiber), RJ45, and coax for wan ports, Fiber and Coax options should include support for Adtran GPON and/or DirecTV,
I know its a tall order but this is the perfect device for me. I could use one device everywhere at thousands of locations…
DJ
`
If it speaks SIP, it will work with FreePBX. If you mean that you want FreePBX to generate the provisioning files for the R201 with a few mouse clicks, but the R201 doesn’t show up in the list of “known” ATAs on FreePBX, well, the responsibility for adding R201 support to FreePBX provisioning sits on the shoulders of the FreePBX developers; that it isn’t in the list is not Cambium’s fault.
Similarly, MikroTik might come out with such a product, but if FreePBX developers don’t actively do something to support it, then it will be in the same boat as the cnPilot, and not through any fault of MikroTik’s. 
Finally, FreePBX is open-source. If you want native cnPilot support, feel free to implement it yourself (and then contribute the code back upstream once you have it working)!
– Nathan