Jeremy McNamara wrote:
Lubomir Christov wrote:
BUT I have the say that I have the same opinion as martin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Although personally I would prefer oh323 for
its very well described config file for now winner is chan_h323
Again, what is not clear about h323.conf? It follows
24 2003 21:27 Jeremy McNamara :
I would like to hear from anyone else that has real world experiences
with both chan_h323 and asterisk-oh323.
I have asterisk-oh323-0.5.7.tar.gz and * from CVS @ 20 Nov 2003.
PWLib 1.5.2, OpenH323 1.12.2
ATA-186(h.323)-gnugk-*-7940(SIP)
I see segmentation
Adam Hart wrote:
From: Jeremy McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would like to hear from anyone else that has real world experiences
with both chan_h323 and asterisk-oh323.
Be brutal. I want to know the gory details, so we can stop any future
pissing matches from even starting by having everything
Max Tulyev wrote:
24 2003 21:27 Jeremy McNamara :
I would like to hear from anyone else that has real world experiences
with both chan_h323 and asterisk-oh323.
I have asterisk-oh323-0.5.7.tar.gz and * from CVS @ 20 Nov 2003.
PWLib 1.5.2, OpenH323 1.12.2
ATA-186(h.323)-gnugk-*-7940(SIP)
I
If it was possible to get any support at all from Jeremy (or others),
I'd be glad to use it. I have sent numerous reports with where it failed
and what I did to remedy this without getting any response. With
developers this arrogant, chan_h323 should be removed from the asterisk
tree, unless the
Jeremy McNamara wrote:
As history shows I was totally blown off by Michael when I offered to
help better his driver. Then I was even told that I couldn't create
anything better...hence the birth of chan_h323 and this whole mess.
Yes, sure, whatever.
Jeremy McNamara
Michael.
On Tuesday 25 November 2003 03:19, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
If it was possible to get any support at all from Jeremy (or others),
I'd be glad to use it. I have sent numerous reports with where it
failed and what I did to remedy this without getting any response.
With developers this
see below
Michael Manousos wrote:
Max Tulyev wrote:
24 2003 21:27 Jeremy McNamara :
I would like to hear from anyone else that has real world experiences
with both chan_h323 and asterisk-oh323.
I have asterisk-oh323-0.5.7.tar.gz and * from CVS @ 20 Nov 2003.
PWLib 1.5.2, OpenH323 1.12.2
I've used both, I find chan_h323 more robust as it does less. Given it
uses
*'s rtp, means less chance of errors but also inherits problems of rtp.c
(inability to set payload) My chan_oh323 still crashes on exit which
concerns me on the quality. (I don't really care if it's on exit).
Wonderfull, since you've had so many terrible problems I'm sure you'll
just jump at the chance to mention all of them in enough detail to 1.
debug and 2. fix. So what are all these issues and what steps can I
take to reproduce them?
Thanks
Nick
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at
Hello,
I managed to terminate calls from cisco: as5300 and 7206 to asterisk over h323.
I tested both oh323 from inaccessnetwork and JerJers chan_h323.
I used 1.12.2 version of oh323 and 1.5.2 version of pwlib.
After latest changes from JerJer chan_h323.c works ok when receiving traffic
from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I managed to terminate calls from cisco: as5300 and 7206 to asterisk over h323.
I would like to add this to the Wiki, but wonder which product you mean in
Cisco's product range?
/O
___
Asterisk-Users mailing list
[EMAIL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Although personally I would prefer oh323 for its very well described
config file for now winner is chan_h323.
What is not clear about h323.conf? IMHO, it is a whole lot simpler
than asterisk-oh323's oh323.conf file.
Jeremy McNamara
I would like to hear from anyone else that has real world experiences
with both chan_h323 and asterisk-oh323.
Be brutal. I want to know the gory details, so we can stop any future
pissing matches from even starting by having everything publicly
documented for all newbies.
Jeremy McNamara
Hello Jeremy,
we are using asterisk for some of our services long time ago especially
SIP and H323 channels - around 10 000 - 15 000 minutes per day.
Regarding oh323 and h323 channels I have to say my opinion is that h323
channel have much better support for some exotic codecs as g72. than
Quoting Olle E. Johansson:
I managed to terminate calls from cisco: as5300 and 7206 to asterisk over
h323.
I would like to add this to the Wiki, but wonder which product you mean in
Cisco's product range?
AS5300 and 7206VXR equipped in apropriate voice processing cards are high
density voip
Lubomir Christov wrote:
BUT I have the say that I have the same opinion as martin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Although personally I would prefer oh323 for
its very well described config file for now winner is chan_h323
Again, what is not clear about h323.conf? It follows the other Asterisk
channel
From: Jeremy McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would like to hear from anyone else that has real world experiences
with both chan_h323 and asterisk-oh323.
Be brutal. I want to know the gory details, so we can stop any future
pissing matches from even starting by having everything publicly
I would like to hear from anyone else that has real world experiences
with both chan_h323 and asterisk-oh323.
For 6 months, I didn't know what was a perfect connection using
both except using G711 with oh323. Few weeks ago, a big mind
from Australia solved the problem with 1 or 2 lines of
I've used both, I find chan_h323 more robust as it does less. Given it
uses
*'s rtp, means less chance of errors but also inherits problems of rtp.c
(inability to set payload)
oops, that was meant to read set payload size, eg 20 frames for G.711
20 matches
Mail list logo
