> I've been playing with GSM and iLBC over low bandwidth connections > (central Asterisk box with 2mbps, to ADSL users on 512/256) and both > seem to perform well. Based upon what I've read in the archives and > at voip-info.org iLBC should perform a little better if packets are > lost, than compared to GSM. Do you find this to be true in practice, > or is GSM just as robust?
I believe that iLBC has better MOS in lossy environments than all other protocols, period. I use it exclusively now with the VOIP providers I use for LD. > Whilst I'm asking questions, in terms of sound quality would there be > a significant benefit in switching to g.729? I have had *zero* voice quality issues with iLBC. I have had voice quality issues due to links that were full, but that's not iLBC's fault. The only reason I can see using g.729 these days is for low-bandwidth interoperability with commercial VOIP equipment that doesn't use iLBC. Seriously. The difference between 11-13kbps for an iLBC conversation vs 8kbps for g.729 is negligable to me. Maybe if you had a thousand calls pumping out your connection, but then again the $10k you spent on g.729 licenses can probably buy a slightly faster link. :-) Regards, Andrew _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
