Jeremy McNamara wrote: > Digium paid for ooh323, for whatever reasons that is beyond me, but it
> has proven to be no better than any H.323 channel driver, so I hope they > got their money back. Better is subjective in this case. There's no doubt that chan_ooh323 has some warts. On the other hand it has NO external library requirements, and works out of the box with Cisco's Call Manager. One could argue that Call Manager is crap. Fine, that doesn't change the fact some of us are stuck with it. Chan_h323 did not work with CCM, and a query/bug report was dismissed, basically stating that Cisco was F'd up and the channel would not be updated to work with it unless funded. (fair, but not helpful) Chan_oh323 worked with CCM, but suffered from the external library requirements. Chan_ooh323 just worked. The code is, to a infrequent programmer, easy to read, extend and fix bugs. So for me chan_ooh323 is a 'better' H.323 channel driver. Dan _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
