<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
David Backeberg wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:3de056a31002191150y6abe4576gf664c20de25842a6@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Mike A. Leonetti
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mleonetti@evolutionce.com"><mleonetti@evolutionce.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">To get MeetMe working properly, I know some sort of timing device
provided by the zaptel package is required (even if it means the
zt_dummy). But, on a virtual machine I know that the Linux timing won't
work as expected. Is it possible to then dedicate a physical device
like a USB port or something to the virtual machine to use for the
timing interrupts?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
You could always use ConfBridge(), starting in 1.6.2.*, which does not
require DAHDI/Zaptel, and therefore doesn't require a timer.
Let me be the first to tell you that using a virt for a conferencing
solution, especially if you want people to actually use it, sounds
like a 'Bad Idea'. You could oversubscribe the resources so you don't
starve the virt, but we already have a name or that. It's called not
using a virt in the first place.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Well, when you're right you're right. If it's really that much of a
bad idea I'll just put in for a real machine. Although virtualizing
seems to be all the buzz lately so I was just wondering if I could
consolidate hardware (or continue to consolidate hardware). Our
internal Asterisk does currently run on KVM.<br>
</body>
</html>