Should I choose Direct Routing or Operator Connect?

Microsoft Teams has long been the central hub for chats, meetings, and files in many companies. However, as soon as employees are expected to make calls directly in Teams using their business phone numbers, an architectural decision must be made: Direct Routing or Operator Connect? Both options connect Microsoft Teams to the public telephone network. However, they differ significantly in terms of integration, flexibility, responsibility, and long-term costs.

The right choice doesn't depend solely on the size of the company. Key factors include your existing phone system, the number of locations, phone number requirements, desired PBX features, and who is responsible for operations and support. Clarifying these points early on helps you avoid duplicate licenses, unnecessary interfaces, and time-consuming migrations down the road.

Direct Routing or Operator Connect: The Fundamental Difference

At Operator Connect A Microsoft-approved telephony provider is selected directly in the Teams Admin Center. Phone numbers and users are assigned within Teams administration. The provider establishes the connection to the public switched telephone network (PSTN) and manages the technical integration in the background. For businesses, this seems straightforward at first: The path to PSTN telephony in Teams is clearly defined and can be implemented with minimal in-house infrastructure.

Direct Routing Teams, on the other hand, connects via a session border controller (SBC) to a SIP trunk or an existing telephony platform. The SBC handles the controlled handoff between Microsoft Teams and the telephony network. It can be operated on-premises, in a data center, or as a managed service provided by a service provider. This architecture offers greater flexibility in choosing a service provider, selecting phone numbers, and integrating existing systems.

Both options generally require the appropriate Microsoft Teams telephony licenses. However, the actual call rates, phone number management, and the feature set of the telephony solution must still be evaluated separately. A Teams license alone does not replace a complete communications architecture.

When Operator Connect Is the Right Solution

Operator Connect is particularly well-suited for companies that want to use Teams as a telephony client in as standardized a way as possible. If there is no need to continue operating a complex phone system, few special features are required, and administration is to be handled centrally in the Microsoft Teams Admin Center, this approach is an attractive option.

The main advantage lies in the reduced technical effort required on the customer’s part. There is no need to plan, secure, or monitor a dedicated SBC. New users can be activated quickly, provided that the desired provider, the required countries, and the existing phone numbers are supported by the Operator Connect model. For individual locations or clearly structured teams, this can be a cost-effective solution.

However, standardization has its limits. Not every carrier, rate plan, or number pool is available through Operator Connect. Even with complex call flows, IVR menus, group call concepts, call forwarding, CTI integrations, or the integration of an existing PBX, the scope of functionality may prove too limited. Anyone operating international locations with different numbering plans should clarify country coverage and porting options in detail before making a decision.

Another consideration is the support process. In the event of a malfunction, it must be clearly defined whether Microsoft, the service provider, or an internal IT partner is responsible. Especially when Internet access, the firewall, Wi-Fi, end devices, and telephony are provided by different service providers, coordination issues can cause delays in the event of a malfunction.

Why Direct Routing Offers More Flexibility

Direct Routing is often the better choice when Teams is intended to be more than just a simple telephony interface—but rather part of an established communications landscape. This approach allows for the targeted integration of existing SIP trunks, Swiss and international phone numbers, as well as an existing cloud PBX or on-premises phone system. This protects investments and enables migration in manageable phases rather than a complete system overhaul on a single deadline.

This is particularly relevant for companies with a reception desk, a service hotline, multiple departments, or different locations. Teams users can directly through their personal business phone number make calls, while key functions such as call routing, call queues, timing controls, IVR, or emergency call systems are managed through the telephone system. IP phones in conference rooms, DECT systems, door intercoms, and fax and alarm connections can also be integrated into a well-designed architecture.

The SBC is not merely a technical intermediary. It secures the connection, manages phone number formats and routing rules, and can support Quality of Service (QoS) requirements. When combined with a properly configured firewall and a stable Internet connection, it creates a controlled environment for business telephony. Companies do not need to operate an SBC themselves: A managed SBC model outsources operation, updates, and monitoring to a specialized partner.

Direct Routing also allows for more flexible pricing. Depending on the calling profile, flat rates, per-minute plans, international rates, or separate billing by location may be appropriate. For companies with a high volume of international calls or a seasonally fluctuating number of users, this flexibility can result in significant cost savings.

Comparing Costs Accurately: Don't Just Look at the Price Per User

In comparisons, Operator Connect is often considered simpler, while Direct Routing is seen as more complex. While this may be true, it doesn’t tell the whole story. The total costs over several years are the deciding factor: Microsoft licenses, phone numbers, call rates, PBX features, SBC operation, implementation, support, and potential adjustments as the business grows.

Operator Connect can be very efficient in a small, homogeneous Teams environment with manageable requirements. Direct Routing, on the other hand, can be worthwhile if a SIP trunk is already in place, special rate plans are required, or a PBX bundles multiple communication channels. Anyone who needs separate Teams add-ons, third-party services, or new platforms for every additional requirement will quickly lose the initial cost advantage.

Administrative costs must also be factored into the calculation. A solution isn’t automatically cost-effective just because it can be set up quickly from a technical standpoint. If changes to call groups, business hours, extensions, or locations are required on a regular basis, user-friendly administration and a direct point of contact are more important than a low initial price.

Planning for Security, Voice Quality, and Reliability

Making calls via Teams places demands on the network. Voice quality depends on bandwidth, latency, packet loss, Wi-Fi coverage, and the prioritization of real-time traffic. Neither Direct Routing nor Operator Connect can compensate for an overloaded or inadequately secured Internet connection.

With Direct Routing, the configuration of the SBC is particularly important. It separates the public network from the internal communications environment and enables clear security policies. With Operator Connect, a large part of the responsibility for connectivity lies with the operator; however, the local network, end devices, and Microsoft tenant configuration remain the responsibility of the company or its IT partner.

For both models, responsibilities should be defined in writing. This includes incident handling, escalation, monitoring, porting procedures, and emergency response procedures. If a primary site or the Internet connection off, key phone numbers must remain accessible in a practical way, for example through alternative contact points or mobile reachability.

The PBX often plays a bigger role than the type of connection

Many companies compare Direct Routing and Operator Connect, even though the more important question is: What functions should the phone system handle in the future? Teams offers basic calling features. However, in complex scenarios, these aren't always sufficient to ensure professional accessibility.

An integrated PBX enhances Teams with features such as multi-level IVR, advanced queues, presence management, LDAP integration, CTI for CRM or ERP systems, detailed routing rules, and cross-location numbering schemes. This turns Teams into your everyday telephony client without disrupting established business processes.

With Winet, the Ayrix PBX can be natively integrated with Microsoft Teams. This is an attractive option for companies that want to use a full-featured phone system and Teams without separate Teams add-ons or additional licensed SBC components. The best way to determine whether this model is a good fit is to examine the actual call paths, existing phone numbers, and operational requirements.

How to Make a Decision in a Structured Way

Don't start by asking which connection is the cheapest; start by defining your vision. Do you want Teams to be a streamlined, largely standardized telephony solution? If so, Operator Connect might be the right choice. Do you want to embed Teams into an existing or future extensive PBX, SIP, and integration landscape? If so, there are many reasons to choose Direct Routing.

Next, review your phone numbers and locations: Which numbers need to be ported, which countries are involved, what emergency call requirements exist, and which teams require centralized call distribution? This is followed by the technical fundamentals—Internet connection, firewall, SBC design, end devices, and support responsibilities.

A good solution doesn’t make communication more complicated—it makes it easier to understand: Employees make calls from wherever they’re working, customers reach the right people, and your IT department keeps costs, security, and operations under control. A hands-on test using real call flows and selected user groups usually provides more clarity before the rollout than any product presentation.