Nitzan Kon wrote: > --- On Mon, 1/5/09, Alex Balashov <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Of course, this will break for a certain percentage of >> users who have NAT gateways or UACs that just don't get it. > > YMMV, but I'd rather deal with proxying all media than trying > to handle/support all the users who do break because of NAT > issues. Overall IMHO proxying media will give *residential* > users the best possible/reliable experience. It might not be > the "best" way to do it - but I don't care about best. I care > about the end result - happy customer. :)
Yeah, I can't argue with that. If it has no appreciable QoS impact and you don't see it as a cost barrier at your level and size, then, just do whatever works. In discussions where it's more relevant, it's always about cost and QoS, generally in that order. I cannot and will not pay for 10x more bandwidth just 'cause it makes me feel good about how 100% well-served every one of my customers' CPE devices is and how harmonious it all feels. Money's on the table. -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775 _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
