It's an interesting idea but I'd not do that unless you are just doing that for home. You want a fully supported PBX platform for business use, not just Asterisk 'available' on Synology.

Asterisk Forums. Ask the community of Asterisk users for help and feedback on issues, including support for installing, upgrading and running Asterisk and AsteriskNow. Download Center. We encourage that you upgrade your Synology Product to the latest Operating System to enjoy the most recent and enriched features.

Synology, to the best of my knowledge, does not provide any support for Asterisk on there so any Asterisk or Synology update might cause problems and patches and updates might not be forthcoming. Beyond that, PBXs are typically high priority and not appropriate for an SMB class NAS device. Synology is nice but this isn't a good use for it, in my opinion. Do you not have a server to put a PBX on? What is driving you to want to consider this route? By using your own PBX on your own hardware you can control what updates are installed to the root OS and not be worried that all of a sudden a Synology update may bomb your Asterisk server.

Then what do you do? What what if a firmware rollback makes Asterisk work but bombs your file shares? By keeping the two separate, you do better in terms of DR and overall control.

More than anything that sounds like something Synology added as a pure marketing tactic to get people to use their device as an all-in-one solution. Scott Alan Miller wrote: It's an interesting idea but I'd not do that unless you are just doing that for home.

You want a fully supported PBX platform for business use, not just Asterisk 'available' on Synology. Synology, to the best of my knowledge, does not provide any support for Asterisk on there so any Asterisk or Synology update might cause problems and patches and updates might not be forthcoming. Download lagu soundtrack transformer dark of the moon. Beyond that, PBXs are typically high priority and not appropriate for an SMB class NAS device. Synology is nice but this isn't a good use for it, in my opinion. Do you not have a server to put a PBX on? What is driving you to want to consider this route?

I'm looking at upgrading our Shoretel system which I'm expecting to be fairly expensive. I plan to compare the cost of other systems besides just paying for the upgrade.

Synology has the ability to mirror two devices and if I was going to do this they would also be dedicated. My thought was that this is basically Asterisk on Linux. But it doesn't sound like anyone has gone this route so I'm not going to spend any more time on it. @Nate What was the result of your PBX research?

I'd be curious to see if you found something cost effective to replace ShoreTel. I've worked on dozens of ShoreTel systems and have been surprised at how resilient it is. With some exception where the handsets or the voice switch are dropped from support, the system can be upgraded forever.

Usually the only thing you need to do is update your server every 5 or 6 years and pay for support to be on the latest version. I'm not paid by ShoreTel, so I don't want to sound like too much of a fanboy. I've thought that small offices might be just as well suited by a freepbx type of system as well. Steve-DC wrote: @Nate What was the result of your PBX research? I'd be curious to see if you found something cost effective to replace ShoreTel.

I've worked on dozens of ShoreTel systems and have been surprised at how resilient it is. With some exception where the handsets or the voice switch are dropped from support, the system can be upgraded forever. Usually the only thing you need to do is update your server every 5 or 6 years and pay for support to be on the latest version. I'm not paid by ShoreTel, so I don't want to sound like too much of a fanboy.

I've thought that small offices might be just as well suited by a freepbx type of system as well. So far I don't know. I'm meeting with our Shoretel vendor in a few weeks. It has been several months since your last post.