You I guess with 2 instances that might be still fine.
Assuming they do not share port numbers that could even still run on the
same hardware.
Thanks,
Seb
Sebastian Wagner
Director Arrakeen Solutions
http://arrakeen-solutions.co.nz/
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 11:28, seba.wag...@gmail.com
wrote:
> Are there any system requirements on CoTurn instances in terms of network
> and hardware ?
>
> I thought all it does is network translations. Which are potentially
> frequent. But very low CPU/memory requirements. As well as the actual
Are there any system requirements on CoTurn instances in terms of network
and hardware ?
I thought all it does is network translations. Which are potentially
frequent. But very low CPU/memory requirements. As well as the actual
network traffic will not happen via the Turn Server
I was thinking I
I think they are waiting for a spec.
However I am still a bit confused who needs to approve that spec?
Do we need the ASF board to approve that spec?
Thanks
Sebastian
2013/9/24 Maxim Solodovnik solomax...@gmail.com
Dear Tony,
Are the any updates on this topic?
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:23
Hi Tony,
this sounds all very reasonable.
The bottleneck in our calculations are often bandwidth requirements.
Memory/disk usage does pretty much scale linear with number of users, but
bandwidth does more like exponential with the number of concurrent sessions.
However I would not be too
Hello Sebastian,
Why do we need this limitation: Apache Ldap, so that only PMC can login?
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:46 PM, seba.wag...@gmail.com
seba.wag...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Tony,
this sounds all very reasonable.
The bottleneck in our calculations are often bandwidth requirements.
We can try to keep the sign up open for everybody.
However the problem with that is the pure amount of data those users will
create.
However there might be other reasons why LDAP is not suited, for instance
that we don't want that anybody enters his Apache Password into our
application.
We can
We can try to keep the sign up open for everybody.
However the problem with that is the pure amount of data those users will
create.
However there might be other reasons why LDAP is not suited, for instance
that we don't want that anybody enters his Apache Password into our
application.
We can
On 24/09/13 11:31, seba.wag...@gmail.com wrote:
We can try to keep the sign up open for everybody.
However the problem with that is the pure amount of data those users will
create.
However there might be other reasons why LDAP is not suited, for instance
that we don't want that anybody enters
Artyom,
Tony said,
actually someone just reminded me that our new EU colo provider
has enough bandwidth to cope with your request - however it is not QoSed
so it cannot be guaranteed - but giving the amount they made available
to us I dont think you would make a significant dent in that.
Tony,
We need to get a vmware host specced up, agreed, purchased, delivered, racked,
installed, configured, a VM created etc,
Once we know this is what we want to do we will need to allow ~1 month
turn-around time. Maybe 6 weeks.
Primarily the delay is in the order, racking, and installing
Tony Stevenson wrote on Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 06:46:55PM +0100:
Alexei Fedotov wrote on Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 09:32:12PM +0400:
Tony, I'm sorry. This was discussed for sure. Things sometimes change over
time, that's why I have asked once again.
We have have several test servers and chat
12 matches
Mail list logo
