we are using asterisk for some of our services long time ago especially SIP and H323 channels - around 10 000 - 15 000 minutes per day.
Regarding oh323 and h323 channels I have to say my opinion is that h323 channel have much better support for some exotic codecs as g72. than OH323. This is because of the technology used in chan_h323 it uses core asterisk rtp stack.
BUT I have the say that I have the same opinion as martin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): "Although personally I would prefer oh323 for its very well described config file for now winner is chan_h323" .. and for some reasons: When we checked the source of chan_h323 (there was some problems few days ago with g729 support - I know it's fixed yet) I had the feeling that the channel was written in a hurry and there are too many things not finished yet - just a example - there are some functions that aren't doing nothing, just return ...
But still the winner is chan_h323 :)
I'm sure that if Jeremy McNamara and Michael Manousos start working together on the H323 support in asterisk - then the things will be MUCH BETTER. And only then * will have a REALLY GOOD H323 support.
Right now we are reading each day the same question: what is better: h323 or oh323 channels - my answer is both if they start to be a ONE project.
Lubo
Jeremy McNamara wrote:
I would like to hear from anyone else that has real world experiences with both chan_h323 and asterisk-oh323.
Be brutal. I want to know the gory details, so we can stop any future pissing matches from even starting by having everything publicly documented for all newbies.
Jeremy McNamara
_______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
_______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
