Greetings !
I am looking into the TDMoE functionality of the Zapata drivers and * and i
am kind of confused.
Lets say i have 2 linux boxes, one has * running but no fxs/fxo hardware the
other has a card (for example an x100p) but does not have * installed.
If i just want to use the card (no *
On Jun 25, 2006, at 1:55 AM, Stelios Koroneos wrote:
Greetings !
I am looking into the TDMoE functionality of the Zapata drivers and *
and i
am kind of confused.
Lets say i have 2 linux boxes, one has * running but no fxs/fxo
hardware the
other has a card (for example an x100p) but does
I asked about a similar application a few weeks back. This is sometimes
referred
to as campusing since you are basically going to make the two systems sharing
their resources appear to be one system. From what I understand, you have
to have both boxes running Asterisk. I am pretty sure that
I am asked to consider deploying asterisk servers as soft-switches on a
large scale, but wanted to preserve TDM properties of a call, especially
for modem applications which some of the end users may want. I was
thinking TDMoE may work well for this, at least on the surafce but had
specific
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] TDMoE question
___
--Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com --
Asterisk-Users mailing list
Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit
On Wed, 2005-10-19 at 10:43 +0100, Appan KH wrote:
You can use MPLS which takes care all the point you had mentioned.
appan kh
Not entirely, at least not as I understand MPLS. MPLS will add a little
bit of data which is used to route the traffic, it doesnt deal with
encapsulating TDM data
TDMoE is useless. I've tested it on newer intel P4 machines with 2.4 and
2.6 kernels. There is CPU peaks causing by TMDoE driver.
If you want pass modem data, try IAX u/alaw codec. In my environment it
works great (switched lan)
trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
On Wed, 2005-10-19 at 10:43
Is there any definition or reference of the TDMoE protocol?
Or it is just 24*64(for T1)+ethrned overhead bits frame each 1/1000 second?
___
Asterisk-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
To
Just a Question. I would like to know if TDMoE follows specifiaciones of
TDMoIP RAD protocol that says that there is a compression of 16/1 when
you do TDMoIP.
Manuel Marin Garcia
TRANSTELCO S.A. DE C.V.
Campos Eliseos 9050 B4 – Cd. Juárez, Chih. 32452 - México
Oficina: +52 656 692 11 09 – Fax:
Rad's TDMoIP uses DSP chips on each end of the link to compress the data.
Gary
Just a Question. I would like to know if TDMoE follows specifiaciones of
TDMoIP RAD protocol that says that there is a compression of 16/1 when
you do TDMoIP.
Manuel Marin Garcia
TRANSTELCO S.A. DE C.V.
It using DSP chips makes no difference, it can be done in software
aswell... (in theory, if its open, and the algorithmic complexity is low)
Secondly, I think just the Name explains the difference between TDMoE
and TDMoIP... it's 2 different things... actually TDMoE offers very much
overhead..
TDMoIP is nothing else like IAX2 with trunking, i would say. And a
compression of 16/1 (payload bandwidth!) sounds like g723.1 to me.
Just a Question. I would like to know if TDMoE follows specifiaciones of
TDMoIP RAD protocol that says that there is a compression of 16/1 when
you do
Klaus-Peter Junghanns wrote:
TDMoIP is nothing else like IAX2 with trunking, i would say. And a
compression of 16/1 (payload bandwidth!) sounds like g723.1 to me.
16:1 means an avaerage of 4kbps per channel. It would have to be G.723.1
with optimistic silence compression to get that low. I
13 matches
Mail list logo
