On 10/09/2012 07:40 AM, Steve Underwood wrote:
On 10/09/2012 12:28 AM, Brett Lehrer wrote:
How many fax and voice calls (which codecs for tha latter ones ?) are on
average using your DSL line ?
1. Previously, I experienced failures during the process of converting
incoming PDF documents into ready-to-send fax image files while the
reverse
process (from a fax file into a PDF or whatever document) never failed.
I would be curious to check if a greater failure rate for outbound
faxing
(greater than inbound faxing failure rate) could simply comes from image
processing, before any transmission.
2. Though your DSL line may have enough bandwidth from your location
to its
DSLAM, chances are packets are dropped or delivered too late for T.38
faxing.
An interesting test would be to use an Asterisk PBX hosted somewhere at
"close range" from netVortex fax gateways : that would remove most
networking issues out of the equation.
I'll have to look more closely into what codecs we traditionally use,
but g.722 up and ulaw down is common. Generally don't have more than
2-3 calls active at once. At most, 5, and that's a rarity. Record
for fax is 4 simultaneous send/receive, but typically just 1, maybe
2. I imagine that's encroaching on the upper limits of the 768 kbps
upspeed. I've wondered about how lag might impact the problem but I
just don't know how I'd go about testing it properly without spending
a bunch of money on hosting.
I do my PDF -> TIFF conversion on another machine with ghostscript.
Here's the line:
gs -q -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -dSAFER -sDEVICE=tiffg4
-sOutputFile=<TIFF_FILENAME> -f <PDF_FILENAME>
I changed from tiffg3 to tiffg4 because the filesize got cut in half
assuming that the less time spent transmitting, the less chance there
was to run into a problem that might stop the fax. However, most
failures that I've looked at seem to occur immediately or fail to
connect at all, rather than get cut off due to a hiccup in the
connection.
Brett Lehrer
A FAX can only be sent in ECM mode when using tiffg4 format. It will
have to be recoded into tiffg3 format if ECM is inhibited, which it far
too often is. On the other hand, if you are using ECM any decent FAX
system (e.g. spandsp) will recode into tiffg4, and really good ones
(e.g. the very latest spandsp) may recoed into T.85/JBIG, for faster
transmission times. Digium don't seem to specify what FFA does in this
area.
Steve
A little puzzled. Do you mean:
1. tiffg4 encoded fax will(might?) fail if ECM is inhibited at either
send or receive.
2. tiffg3 will work if ECM is inhibited.
3. If ECM is not inhibited, any decent fax system, will reencode tiffg3
to tiffg4.
Therefore we should encode to tiffg3 and let spandsp determine if it
should be rencoded to tiffg4 (or T.85/JBIG)?
sean
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs:
http://www.asterisk.org/hello
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
