Based on the initial response, I should probably clarify what I'm asking.
I know that some applications, as asterisk is developed now, require a
zaptel timing source. However, is this requirement necessary? Would
certain platforms, if asterisk was written to accept it, be able to handle
Based on the initial response, I should probably clarify what I'm
asking.
I know that some applications, as asterisk is developed now, require a
zaptel timing source. However, is this requirement necessary? Would
certain platforms, if asterisk was written to accept it, be able to
handle
Jason
You make a good point. However, until every old telcom person out
there keels over, people will want to know the timing source. Some
platforms may or may not have a good system timer and thus neet the
ZtDummy.
Andrew
On 12/28/05, Jason DiCioccio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on the
Yes and no. Recent advances in Linux (RT patches, Hi-Res timers) that
are approaching a merge to the mainline kernel raise the possibility
that timing could be migrated to the core of Asterisk.
This would be great in my mind..
On the other hand, if you have a hardware timer, you might
On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 14:04 -0500, Jason DiCioccio wrote:
My understanding is that on OS's other than Linux (FreeBSD, for
example), the support is there right now for this, but instead of having
asterisk support these native timers directly, ztdummy was ported.
Why wouldn't you just create a
On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 10:46:41AM -0800, Dan Austin wrote:
Basically, I'm not asking if asterisk as it is today requires ztdummy.
I'm asking if the requirement is necessary.
Yes and no. Recent advances in Linux (RT patches, Hi-Res timers) that
are approaching a merge to the mainline
