<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7650.28">
<TITLE>asterisk-dev Digest, Vol 24, Issue 23</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText99801 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>Kevin -</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>> ----- Constantine Filin
<cfilin@intermedia.net> wrote:<BR>> > 1) Right now RTP bridging
happens in channel.c in function<BR>> > "ast_generic_bridge". This
function<BR>> This is only true if the call requires monitoring for
DTMF-controlled <BR>> features. If it does not, the bridging happens in rtp.c
itself, without <BR>> packing the data into/out of ast_frame
objects.</FONT></DIV><FONT size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2><BR>
<DIV dir=ltr>Please correct me if I am wrong. I think that ast_generic_bridge is
much<BR>more common than you are describing. For example
"ast_generic_bridge"<BR>is used when channels of different technilogy are
bridged or when the<BR>native bridge through rtp.c is not possible (for example
because of a NATed<BR>SIP telephone), or when there is transcoding
involved.<BR><BR>> > of winners, then this can<BR>> > shave off
quite a bit of CPU cycles and increase the performance. Of<BR>> > course
the rest of "ast_generic_bridge" has to be modified to work <BR>>
>with several winners.<BR>> Do you really think calling ast_waitfor_n a
second time is going to make <BR>> much of a difference?<BR><BR>I have a
problem at hand and I am willing to try all possible ways to fix
it.<BR><BR>Constantine Filin</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>CTO </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>Intermedia.NET</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr> </DIV></FONT></DIV>
</BODY>
</HTML>