On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 20:10 +0100, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: > El Jueves, 10 de Enero de 2008, Jerome Martin escribió: > > > To summarize, I'd say that if you rely on RTP detection for billing, > > then you have the following limitations : > > - unreliable problem detection > > - stuck with RTP proxying for ALL calls > > - problems with VAD > > - problems in corner cases with re INVITES changing the RTP stream > > extremities > > > > What do you think ? > > I think that I should thank to you for a great explanation ;)
What, you're not even arguing ? :-) You're too kind. But seriously, this is a pretty hot subject, and I've never met anyone suggesting the same as I did here, most of the time I hear the same thing about rtpproxy + CDRs reliability. I'm sure some people are challenging what I wrote right now, in their mind ! If we are lucky, we'll even get emails ! Disclaimer: the above paragraph was not meant to start a flame war on the topic between SST/pinging schools and RTP detection ones. At worst, the two techniques can really complement each other. Regards, -- Jérôme Martin | LongPhone Responsable Architecture Réseau 122, rue la Boetie | 75008 Paris Tel : +33 (0)1 56 26 28 44 Fax : +33 (0)1 56 26 28 45 Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : www.longphone.com <http://www.longphone.com> _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
