On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:10:23 +0100, Patrick wrote: >On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 12:56 +0100, Alejandro Vargas wrote: >[snip] >> On other way, I must accept that skype codec has a very good compression. > >Iirc they use iLBC Wideband which is 16KHz and does not work with >Asterisk which uses 8KHz. I'm not an expert though so I might have >misunderstood. > >Regards, >Patrick
Yesterday was very interesting with respect to PSGW. Several co-workers who are Skype users in the UK called me. I'm in Texas. Those who called from our corp offices are behind a MS Proxy Server (ISA) and using MS proxy clients. These calls suffered latency issues that were bad. Not quote useless, but generally unacceptable. Later on one of them called me via Skype from his home, with only a firewall and no proxy server. That call was MUCH better. This leads me to beleive that perhaps that PSGW software is not the entire problem.....but it's surely part of it. It's clearly a less than ideal solution. I suspect that it's better than the VTA-1000, which would break the Skype call out to a FXS, requiring me to bridge into * via an FXO. I hate FXOs. I've gone to considerable lengths to test FXO devices (TDM400, X101, SPA-3000, etc) and found none viable long term solutions. I now call forward my remaining POTS lines to DID provided by an ITSP. That's been much better than fighting with FXO interfaces for one or two lines. Michael -- Michael Graves [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sr. Product Specialist www.pixelpower.com Pixel Power Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] o713-861-4005 o800-905-6412 c713-201-1262 fwd 54245 _______________________________________________ --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
