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: +52 656 692 1112 - Celular: 915 727 6141 http://www.transtelco.com.mx
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. > Campos Eliseos 9050 B4 ??" Cd. Ju??rez, Chih. 32452 - M??xico > Oficina: +52 656 692 11 09 ??" Fax: +52 656 692 1112 - Celular: 915 727 > 6141 > http://www.transtelco.com.mx > > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >
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 guess IAX2 is the *only* standard for TDMoIP, since the other trunked solutions are totally closed. :-) Regards, Steve
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 questions regarding modem data on the call. As most of you are aware a TDM network virtually guarantees that the data that enters the network comes out at the same cadence that it went in. Modems like this near exact timing. IP networks have no such guarantee so modems tend to not want to work well when VoIP protocols are used. Compression methods (codecs) used in VoIP can also distort the data for a modem call, as such they are undesirable. The usage that I am considering would be to have soft switches placed in stragetic locations throughout a large geographic area but be able to provide service to customers, which can include modem usage (think large phone company selling arbitrary phone lines to be used however the customer sees fit). As such I need modems to be able to work over this network. I had considered linking all the remote sites together via TDMoE (private network primarily using dark fiber). Does TDMoE provide effectively the same capacity to preserve modem data (upto and including "56k" speeds) as a T1 would? Or would I need to actually transmit voice channels on T1/DS3/whatever framed circuits using the Zap interface? Has anyone tried TDMoE on longer runs, or at all with modem data? -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel UK +44 870 340 4605 Germany +49 801 777 555 3402 US +1 360 207 0479 or +1 516 687 5200 FreeWorldDialup: 635378 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20051019/0369a3af/attachment.pgp
You can use MPLS which takes care all the point you had mentioned. appan kh ----- Original Message ----- From: "trixter aka Bret McDanel" <trixter@0xdecafbad.com> To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" <asterisk-users@lists.digium.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 9:54 AM 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: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
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 khNot 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 (say from a T1 or DS3 from a telco) and allowing that to cross a data link. So that still leaves the question of TDMoE or not given that I need to optionally (and unknown beforehand) be able to traffic modem data reliably. Unless you are talknig about using MPLS with TDMoE which doesnt answer the actual question I had about has anyone tried it, does it work reliably even at the faster modem speeds, etc. -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel UK +44 870 340 4605 Germany +49 801 777 555 3402 US +1 360 207 0479 or +1 516 687 5200 FreeWorldDialup: 635378 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20051019/305ae493/attachment.pgp
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 * reduduncy etc) from the machine that runs *, do i need to have * running on both boxes for this to work ? or loading the appropriate drivers to the second machine will be saficient ? The examples i have seen mention zapata.conf entries which make me think that * should be running on both machines, but i am not sure if this applies in my case. Any ideas, thoughts, links etc are more than welcome regards Stelios S. Koroneos
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 it's the Asterisk software, not the Zapata hardware, that does the actual sharing. :) Undrhil --- Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion <asterisk-users@lists.digium.com wrote:> On Jun 25, 2006, at 1:55 AM, Stelios Koroneos wrote: > > >Greetings !> > I am looking into the TDMoE functionality of the Zapata driversand *> > 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 wantto "use" the card (no * reduduncy etc) from the machine> > that > > runs*, do i need to> > have * running on both boxes for this to work ? or loadingthe> > appropriate > > drivers to the second machine will be saficient?> > The examples i have seen mention zapata.conf entries which make me> > think > > that * should be running on both machines, but i am not sureif this> > applies > > in my case. > > > > Any ideas, thoughts, linksetc are more than welcome> > > Sounds like you would definitely need asteriskon the box with the> card. I don't think the driver can do anything allon it's own.> > I am really a newbie though, so don't take my word asgospel.> > Marty > > _______________________________________________> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- > > Asterisk-Usersmailing list> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users>