[Asterisk-Dev] Is there a need for a DS3 channel/driver?

[Race Vanderdecken]

Yes it might be crazy, but what if it worked?

Let us stipulate for the moment that it will work, given a fast server
to run it on.

	45Mbps comes in 64Mbps second goes out. That means a gigabit
interface out the back.

	Get a CPU with a load of speed and cache.

	672 voice channels in 1U.

	If it can fit in a PCI slot then the sever motherboard can
transfer the data to a program

	672 threads? Hmm, might be better with 28 threads, save on
thread swapping times.

So, it is working at time X in the future.

What is the business use for such a toy?

Race Vanderdecken


-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-dev-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-dev-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of
alex at pilosoft.com
Sent: 18 November 2004 15:49
To: Asterisk Developers Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Dev] Is there a need for a DS3 channel/driver?

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Mike M wrote:

> Sometimes in the so-called unchannelized streams you are informed of
> where the frame boundry is in the bitstream.  With that information
one
> can create soft-channelization.  Perhaps this is unreasonable for a
DS3
> however.
Given that its a tough problem to drive current generation of quad-T1 
cards without frame slips, I think doing soft-ds3 stuff is crazy. It
could 
be possible given enough buffers...But I think its crazy ;)
-alex

_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Dev mailing list
Asterisk-Dev at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev