Vladimir- > Transcoding can be supported in software as well.
Not at high capacity, like 20,000+ AMR-WB calls in a 1U server. My experience has been that high volume users of SBC products are SWaP constrained -- especially limited space and power consumption. Their end customers do not allow a stacks of servers for voice/video transcoding, speech recognition, etc. -Jeff > As the maintainers of SEMS we fully agree with Carsten and Alex: the SBC > module of SEMS is a good replacement of a typical SBC. If one also is > looking for ease of usage, support, high availability and a powerful GUI > then the answer is the ABC SBC which is based on SEMS and the SBC > module. A free trial is provided under http://www.frafos.com/free-trial/ > > The ABC SBC also enables easy configuration of LCR using provisioned > tables and comes in an active-strandby configuration that enables > failover without call interruption. Transcoding can be supported in > software as well. > > Best Regards, > -Vladimir > > On 27.2.2014 07:24, Melanie Pietersen wrote: >> looking at this, is there some howto for setting up high-availability, >> LCR and route-by-route transcoding? >> >> Melanie >> >> On 2/20/14 7:12 PM, Carsten Bock wrote: >>> Hi Francesco, >>> >>> i would recommend, you look at the SEMS-project and it's SBC module. >>>> From the functionality perspective, i don't think you'll miss anything >>> compared to Acme Packet, latest trunk version even has a Registration >>> cache, which works absolutely great... >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Carsten >>> >>> 2014-02-20 17:04 GMT+01:00 Francesco Maria Magnini <fmm1...@gmail.com>: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I would like to have some suggestions about a full replacement of an >>>> ACME Packet Net-Net Session Border Controller. >>>> By now, ACME SBC performs all the SBC functionalities, mainly: >>>> >>>> - it is used as a SIP endpoint for SIP client registrations >>>> - it is used as a SIP endpoint for interconnection to multiple SIP >>>> carriers via SIP trunks >>>> - it is used for NAT traversal >>>> >>>> In this deployment, the SIP Server communicates only with the SBC >>>> and this one takes care of the communication between the SIP Server >>>> and the external SIP entities (UA clients, SIP Trunks). >>>> In this scenario, can I consider to replace the SBC with Kamailio? >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list >>>> sr-users@lists.sip-router.org >>>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list >> sr-users@lists.sip-router.org >> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > > _______________________________________________ > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list > sr-users@lists.sip-router.org > http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > _______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
