Wow! That helps out alot. Thanks Robert!
Thomas N.
""Robert Hanley"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Thomas;Without knowing more about your actual network topology the best I
> can do is offer a few pointers, but here goes.384k is generally considered
> the lowest common denominator for acceptable quality professional
> videoconferencing. This was originally based on a 3-Bri h.320 (ISDN)
system.
> If people are not moving around much it is not necessary to send screen
> updates as often in order to maintain a subjectively acceptable
experience.
> It depends on whether your doing a talking head type of thing where
someone
> is sitting at a table as opposed to distance learning with a person moving
> around alot. While Polycom is generally considered the professional's
> choice, VCON http://www.vcon.commakes excellent h.320 and h.323 (IP) based
> videoconferencing systems which include a rate adaptive algorithm which
can
> reduce the rate of updates sent out based upon network congestion. They
also
> have an interactive multicast capability which is unmatched by any other
> vendor as far as I know. I would highly recommend their products.One of
the
> possible solutions to your bandwidth limitations would be to use an h.320
to
> h.323 gateway such as the Accord MCU (for PRI...now owned by Polycom)
which
> will also give you a "Brady Bunch" group view of multiple participants or
> Radvision L2W-323 (for BRI). These would allow you to do your
> videoconferencing over IP within your campus(es) and use ISDN to extend
the
> calls to other sites without impacting your data network as well as adding
> the capability of calling outside of your corporation to anyone else's
h.320
> based system.Of course this is all assuming you were interested in
> videoconferencing. If video streaming is part of your query, you had best
> plan on at least 1.5Mb/sec for an acceptable MPEG1 stream. There are
several
> players, Minerva probably being the best of the breed for encoders,
Optibase
> being another. I get CNBC to the desktop at work via IP multicast. It's
> pretty cool I must say, just make sure you have IGMP snooping, er excuse
me
> CGMP enabled on your switches.As mentioned by others QOS is also important
> whenever you are running any latency sensitive traffic, but especially for
> IP Telephony and Video.HTH> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf> Of> > > Thomas N.> > > Sent:
> Monday, September 10, 2001 8:35 PM> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >
> Subject: Video/Voice over IP [7:19351]> > >> > >> > > Hi All,> > >> > > My
> company is concerning about running> voice/video over IP> > > network.
Our
> WAN> > > is running on fractial T1, so bandwidth> limitation is a big
> problem> to> us.> > > What will be the mininum bandwidth requirement> for
> voice and> > > video traffic?> > > 128k? Thanks!> > >> > > Thomas N.> > >
and
> subscription info:> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html> Report
> misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo!
Messenger.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=19383&t=19351
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
