Doug Lytle wrote:
Doug Lytle wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I put a Tellabs 64ms echo canceller into my facility this weekend and
am praying that it removes are echo problem. If it does, I plan on
making it a standard on my Asterisk installs that have a channel bank
or T1.
Well, the
I put a Tellabs 64ms echo canceller into my facility this weekend and
am praying that it removes are echo problem. If it does, I plan on
making it a standard on my Asterisk installs that have a channel bank
or T1.
Well, the day is almost over here and not one echo reported
Feb 2006 22:09:34 +0800
From: Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] BAD/GOOD Echo Cancel
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Richard Amerman wrote:
Doug,
Can you provide any information on how you deployed that card
into your setup? If it works for you we could put up a page on voip-info.org
Richard
I currently have 13 incoming analog centrex lines plugged into an Adit
600 Channel bank. The
More than that, in their fine print some only claim to pass maybe two or
three of the tests. There is nothing that defines what you must achieve
before you can claim G.168-2002 compliance.
Well, isn't that just wonderful :-) Standards are amazing things, from a
marketing perspective
Rich Adamson wrote:
More than that, in their fine print some only claim to pass maybe two or
three of the tests. There is nothing that defines what you must achieve
before you can claim G.168-2002 compliance.
Well, isn't that just wonderful :-) Standards are amazing things, from a
06, 2006 5:46 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] BAD/GOOD Echo Cancel
virtually all software echo cancelers cannot get double echo removed
completly. It can get the first one but not the second one. There
are
instances where you get
I had bad echo as well using the Te406 card. Swapped the card, swapped
the box, nothing helped, until I got a Tellabs 2572 echo canceler, and
echo is now gone.
On 2/6/06, Doug Lytle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doug Lytle wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I put a Tellabs 64ms echo canceller
,
Francois BERGERET,
France.
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de David Stude
Envoyé : mardi 7 février 2006 17:09
À : 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
Objet : RE: [Asterisk-Users] BAD/GOOD Echo Cancel
I've used Voicetronix
hi,
How good or bad is the EC in Asterisk?
Can anyone prove that it works at all and what it's limitations are?
I ask cause I have some problems with this myself which variate from
call to call, and I see from others that Echo Cancel is a quite common
topic.
Jan
On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 10:49 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
How good or bad is the EC in Asterisk?
Can anyone prove that it works at all and what it's limitations are?
I ask cause I have some problems with this myself which variate from
call to call, and I see from others that Echo
hi,
How good or bad is the EC in Asterisk?
Can anyone prove that it works at all and what it's limitations are?
I ask cause I have some problems with this myself which variate from
call to call, and I see from others that Echo Cancel is a quite common
topic.
Jan
I have
virtually all software echo cancelers cannot get double echo removed
completly. It can get the first one but not the second one. There
are
instances where you get a 2nd echo, so ... Asterisk is no exception
from this afaik nothing software only based is.
If you really want good echo
On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 21:46 +1100, James Harper wrote:
Just an enquiring mind wanting to know, but how is a hardware solution
different to a software solution? The echo cancellers in the Digium
hardware presumably just use the same sort of algorithms as the software
versions, so it is just
Till: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Ämne: RE: [Asterisk-Users] BAD/GOOD Echo Cancel
virtually all software echo cancelers cannot get double echo removed
completly. It can get the first one but not the second one. There
are
instances where you get a 2nd echo, so
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
Again, I know Sangoma is a sore subject with some on this list, but the
echo cancelation stuff I heard while presented by a Sangoma employee was
not Sangoma specific, although it did include some research into
different hardware/software based
On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 04:01 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
Again, I know Sangoma is a sore subject with some on this list, but the
echo cancelation stuff I heard while presented by a Sangoma employee was
not Sangoma specific, although it
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
Again, I know Sangoma is a sore subject with some on this list, but the
echo cancelation stuff I heard while presented by a Sangoma employee was
not Sangoma specific, although it did include some research into
On Feb 6, 2006, at 5:04 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Im curious. Does anyone have experienced echo-problems that later
where solved by buying a hardware-echo canceller such as the
Wildcard TE411P?
Yes. I turned off all echo can on the wildcards and bought external.
Did you test the echo delay?
will 64ms be suffitient?
You can easily test the delay by recording the transmit and receive path
to a sound file and using some sound editing software see how big the
delay is.
That is how I did it when I worked for a Telco in Switzerland on theis
TDM switch they
James Harper wrote:
virtually all software echo cancelers cannot get double echo removed
completly. It can get the first one but not the second one. There
are
instances where you get a 2nd echo, so ... Asterisk is no exception
from this afaik nothing software only based is.
If you
Krystian Filiks wrote:
Did you test the echo delay?
will 64ms be suffitient?
You can easily test the delay by recording the transmit and receive
path to a sound file and using some sound editing software see how big
the delay is.
That is how I did it when I worked for a Telco in Switzerland
Doug Lytle wrote:
Krystian Filiks wrote:
Did you test the echo delay?
will 64ms be suffitient?
You can easily test the delay by recording the transmit and receive
path to a sound file and using some sound editing software see how
big the delay is.
That is how I did it when I worked for a
Krystian Filiks wrote:
If they could hear their own voices than I would not invest in echo
cancelling and for this is the far end responcible so I would take
contact with the service suppliers and ask them if echo canceling is
included.
These are standard analog (Centrex) lines.
Echo
Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 6:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] BAD/GOOD Echo Cancel
James Harper wrote:
virtually all software echo cancelers cannot get double echo removed
completly. It can get the first one but not the second one
James Harper wrote:
Just an enquiring mind wanting to know, but how is a hardware solution
different to a software solution? The echo cancellers in the Digium
hardware presumably just use the same sort of algorithms as the software
versions, so it is just that they are dedicated and perform
,
Chris Earle
System Solutions Specialist
- Original Message -
From: Jerry Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: SV: [Asterisk-Users] BAD/GOOD Echo Cancel
Doug Lytle wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I put a Tellabs 64ms echo canceller into my facility this weekend and
am praying that it removes are echo problem. If it does, I plan on
making it a standard on my Asterisk installs that have a channel bank
or T1.
Well, the day is almost over
For the record, I've done a couple of Asterisk installs, and HATED echo
-- or feebly attempting to get Asterisk's flakey software algorithms to
do anything about it. Finally got sick 'n tired, and threw money at it
-- got the Sangoma quad-span T1 card.
And echo freaking VANISHED. (Note that,
Ken D'Ambrosio wrote:
They use the G.168-2002 algorithm; I, personally, had never heard of it
before, but I bounced it off a friend of mine (he's a hardware architect
for a major VoIP switch manufacturer -- they sell to places like Time
Warner), and he was of the opinion that G.168 is the
Ken D'Ambrosio wrote:
For the record, I've done a couple of Asterisk installs, and HATED echo
-- or feebly attempting to get Asterisk's flakey software algorithms to
do anything about it. Finally got sick 'n tired, and threw money at it
-- got the Sangoma quad-span T1 card.
And echo freaking
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Ken D'Ambrosio wrote:
They use the G.168-2002 algorithm; I, personally, had never heard of it
before, but I bounced it off a friend of mine (he's a hardware architect
for a major VoIP switch manufacturer -- they sell to places like Time
Warner), and he was of the
Steve Underwood wrote:
More than that, in their fine print some only claim to pass maybe two or
three of the tests. There is nothing that defines what you must achieve
before you can claim G.168-2002 compliance.
Well, isn't that just wonderful :-) Standards are amazing things, from a
Doug,
Can you provide any information on how you deployed that card into your setup? If it works for you we could put up a page on voip-info.org
Richard
On 2/6/06, Doug Lytle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
Again, I know
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, Steve Underwood wrote:
More than that, in their fine print some only claim to pass maybe two or
three of the tests. There is nothing that defines what you must achieve
before you can claim G.168-2002 compliance.
So what echo canceller do you recommend to purchase?
-Dan
35 matches
Mail list logo
