On Tue, 3 Aug 2004, Steve Underwood wrote:
> It would probably help if you understood what that table means. It is > very misleading. G.729 has features to mitigate the awfulness of a lost > packet. It has nothing to help conceal lost packets really well. What I > said is correct. If you fudge over a lost G.711 packet it has less bad > effect than fudging over a lost G.729 packet. There is no missing > smoothing data, so at least the packets you have are handled properly. In an appendix of the G711 spec there's a simple but good concealer for G711. I wanted to implement it once Asterisk can take advantage. Steve _______________________________________________ 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