On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 21:15:51 -0400, Steve Kann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The chart is good, but I think it makes a mistake for iLBC: > > Isn't iLBC 13.something kbps? > > Also, since iLBC uses 30ms frames (when used with asterisk, at least), > it has slightly lower overhead. Approx 2/3 as much overhead.
I had assumed that this was the reason why Wasim used 9kbps for ILBC. 13.5 * 2/3 = 9 But, you are right, there should be a footnote somewhere that says so. > (not that I'm a big iLBC fanboy or anything.. -- I still prefer a free > codec). Indeed. Also, ILBC is more forgiving on packet loss. G729 sucks with packet loss. In my experience the combination of IAX and ILBC is what makes reliable VoIP possible in third world countries with poor internet infrastructure. Places where SIP+G729 simply does not work. rgds benjk -- Sunrise Telephone Systems, 9F Shibuya Daikyo Bldg., 1-13-5 Shibuya, Tokyo, Japan. NB: Spam filters in place. Messages unrelated to the * mailing lists may get trashed. _______________________________________________ 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
