On 9/30/2005, "Dan Austin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Asking which H323 channel is the best turns out to be a deeply > personal issue, at least noting the responses in the past.
You got that right! 8-) > I've tried and used all three. Here are my thoughts- > > Chan_h323 (the original)- > Did not work in our environment. Known issues with Cisco's > Call Manager. Other than the requirements for OpenH323 and > PWLib, it was easy to setup and configure. > > Chan_oh323 > Worked fine for us. Has the same dependencies as chan_h323, > also easy to setup and configure. > > Chan_h323 (ooh323c based) > This one has been a winner for us. No dependencies on OpenH323 > or PWLib, which while not terrible to build/setup, is extra effort > and can be tricky to match known working versions. > Setup and configuration has been very simple. If you have configured > the other channels, this one should seem familiar. > > A seperate note in favor of the new chan_h323 is the developer support. > I found a couple little bugs that related to our use of Cisco Call > Manager, and expected little or no interest in getting them resolved. > I had a test version made available to me in just over a day and > complete resolution a few hours later. Dan - as a thought - I am messing with a H323 'capable' IP Phone and I am (maybe foolishly) trying to use ooh323 with no gateway, gatekeeper, or anything else and I am not getting it to work too well. It seems 'sometimes' it does work. Is there any way - as far as you (or anyone else) knows that this will work with any flavor of H323 on Asterisk? I could just be messing up the configs. Brett _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
