Hey,There's a lot of ways to design, but since the introduction of
video it's popular to centralize conferencing resources. An 8 core Virtual
Telepresence Server can host a lot of audio-only participants. Cisco Meeting
Server is essentially the same concept with centralized resources. It also
depends if PSTN connectivity is distributed or centralized. If it's distributed
there's usually a reason for local DSP resources. Therefore a light amount of
confernecing can be done on the local router. For me it comes down to where to
spend the money. I would prefer to buy bandwidth for sites and centralized
compute and resources. However, it's really just a matter of preference. Two or
five or ten audio streams across the WAN isn't a big deal to me. When the
conferencing gets above your WAN bandwidth percentage that you've worked out
for audio then it's definitely a different story. Thanks! ---- On Thu, 10 Nov
2016 13:24:22 -0500 Hendrix, Bill W. - US<[email protected]> wrote ----
Hey guys, Just wondering what the recommendation is for DSP resources,
distributed vs centralized. I’ve always thought it best to have remote DSP
resources along with centralized resources. This way, if say you have folks
conference together in a remote call, the stream to the central office is one
stream. I’m pretty sure the “resource” selected is based on the initiator of
the conference. User A at central office calls PSTN, and conferences in
user at remote office, then the DSP resource would come from the central
office, assuming it is configured as such in the MRGL. User B at a remote
site calls the PSTN which routes thru the Central office connection, then
conferences in another person who is in their office (yeah, I know they could
just be on the same call in one room). In this case, if there are only
centralized media resources, wouldn’t there now be two voice streams from that
remote office to the conference resource at the central office? If the remote
office had local media resources, then it would be just one stream to the
central office, correct? Isn’t this more ideal? Regards, Bill Hendrix
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
