[Asterisk-Users] HylaFAX v. spandsp

[Darren Nickerson]

"Michael Welter" <mike at introspect.com> writes:


> Can someone explain where we are with spandsp?  Is it ready for a 
> production environment?  How much will one fax using spandsp load the 
> processor on an * system?

I believe Steve Underwood has some important improvements planned that will 
make spandsp's txfax and rxfax applications more robust. 'Production 
quality' is a very subjective term ... how about you try it and let us know 
what _you_ think ;-) One caution - since it runs inside the core of 
asterisk, any serious problems that _may_ exist in the current code could 
take asterisk out of service until you restart it.

Your subject line suggested you want to compare txfax/rxfax and HylaFAX. You 
can't, really ... they're different tools for different jobs. HylaFAX is 
much more than just a modem engine, .. it's a framework for sending and 
receiving large volumes of faxes, and for managing those faxes in the most 
flexible, configurable way possible. If you just need a relatively simple 
virtual fax machine for receiving a few faxes, converting them to PDF and 
emailing them to you, you can probably convince rxfax to do that for you. I 
wouldn't think it would hit the CPU any more heavily than transcoding one 
audio stream.

-Darren

--
Darren Nickerson
Senior Sales & Support Engineer
iFAX Solutions, Inc. www.ifax.com
darren.nickerson at ifax.com
+1.215.438.4638 x8106
+1.215.243.8335 (fax)