[Asterisk-Users] Adit 600 as VoIP router (MGCP) and Asterisk

[Daniel Nyström]

As CarrierAccess states, there can be potential mismatch regarding the TDM signaling required to terminate the voice channels onto the FXS cards.
I'm not sure I understand this fully.
He also says "Although E1 still remains as another option, given a compatible signaling pattern". Since I'm a real newbie in this area, I don't know what the signaling pattern would be?

Of course I could ask them all this questions, but it can take a long time until answer arrive. One thing is the time difference. And now, the seller has gone on a trip for the weekend, and won't be back until Monday. Which will become tuesday in Sweden. And my project is really urgent!
Thanks for helping me out!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Svensson" <psvasterisk at psv.nu>
To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com>
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Adit 600 as VoIP router (MGCP) and Asterisk


> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, Daniel Nyström wrote:
> 
> > Do you think it's hearable? All communication will be on a dedicated
> > Fast Ethernet link (just a cross-over cable). And it will still use aLaw
> > codec (same as Euro ISDN afaik).
> 
> > Since E1 = 2048Kbps and FastEth = 100Mbps, I concidered it fast enough
> > to not make any latency. It seems like MGCP also can use UDP. In that
> > case, there won't be any retransmission or anything.
> 
> What you will notcie is the packetization delay of 20ms (or 30 depening on
> the codecs) which yeilds 40-60ms round trip time possibly combined with
> jitter buffers. The transmission time, once packetized is usually not very
> significant, it is the packetization and possible user level queues that 
> mess up the latency.
> 
> The delay on almost any voip technology can transform a nice sidetone to a 
> nasty echo. This is one of many reasons telecom people strive to minimize 
> latency.
> 
> > Do you have any experiences using MGCP of any kind?
> 
> Unfortunatly not. 
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
>