> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alastair Maw > > Mike Mitchell wrote: > > >> How about not requiring any type of timer anymore? > > > On 06/07/04 18:20, Jeremy McNamara wrote: > > > Ok Mr. Smart guy, show us how to mix audio without a 1000hz > interrupt. > > > > Every Conference application i've ever seen (even outside > of asterisk) > > requires an interrupt. > > This blatantly isn't required. You accept that conferencing > will introduce a small delay (which you need anyway to > de-jitter the UDP packets), write the streams into circular > buffers, and mix these buffers down 20ms later. > It's not exactly rocket science. > > I know that this works, because I'm running conferencing on > my Java IAX2 stack across tens of simultaneous calls using > nothing better than > Thread.sleep() (which has a resolution of about 23ms on a 2.4 kernel).
The RTP stack uses a packet scheduler that doesn't require zaptel for timing. I'm curious.. Who knows of any reasons that a hardware clock would be better than a software scheduler for this? Is there a reason we wouldn't want to use a software scheduler? Rich _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
