If bandwidth were not an issue, I would think everyone would opt for ulaw or alaw. Why compress and use CPU cycles and G729 licenses if there were no bandwidth issues?
Thanks, Steve totaro Wai Wu wrote: > But his preference of G729 is to save bandwidth. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Panton > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 8:16 AM > To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion > Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] meetme conference using g729? > > Not exactly. > Here are the facts: > meetme mixes in SLIN. > Any data arriving in anything other than slin will get > transcoded twice, > once on the way in and again on the way out. > > Now some opinions: > The more efficient the compression of the codec, the less well > it copes with > decoding and re-encoding. Ulaw and Alaw are simple and not that > efficient, > but you don't lose any more by re-encoding than you did by > decoding in the first place. > Tighter codecs like 729 and GSM you will definitely hear the > difference. > > > Theory: > If you have a conference where there is only _ever_ one speaker > at a time, you could (in theory) optimize meetme to do without > mixing, and if all > the participants were using the same codec, you could get away > with not re-encoding > by sending out the appropriate incomming packet to all (other) > members. > I'm guessing that isn't the case for you. > > Advice: > use Ulaw - it's a decent tradeoff for this sort of thing. > > Tim. > _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
