[asterisk-dev] AST_FRAME_DIGITAL

[Sergio Garcia Murillo]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Russell Bryant" <russell at digium.com>
To: "Asterisk Developers Mailing List" <asterisk-dev at lists.digium.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-dev] AST_FRAME_DIGITAL


> Klaus Darilion wrote:
> > Thus, why do we have a AST_FRAME_IMAGE? Why is IMAGE not treated as
> > VOICE? Obviously because Asterisk would transcode and the image is
> > broken - the same reason why I like AST_FRAME_DIGITAL.
>
> I don't think that comparing IMAGE to DIGITAL is a valid comparison.  I
can look
> at the image in an IMAGE frame.  I can listen to the audio in a VOICE
frame.
> But what about DIGITAL?  How is Asterisk supposed to interpret a DIGITAL
frame?
>  It is completely arbitrary.
>
> I'm not sure how many ways I can say this.  The stream you're dealing with
is
> _voice_ and _video_, both of which have explicit frame types in Asterisk.
The
> stream should be decoded and passed into Asterisk using this method.
There are
> good reasons for it being this way.  It is the whole reason that Asterisk
is
> able to bridge calls between completely different technologies - ISDN to
IAX2 or
> whatever the case may be.  Furthermore, by explicitly using the voice and
video
> frame types, Asterisk is able to handle transcoding if necessary.  If both
ends
> of the call are set up to use the same audio and video formats, Asterisk
will
> not touch the contents.

So basically you're telling me that if i want to bridge one video call from
a pri with
chan_zap to a bri with chan_misdn I should try another pbx because asterisk
architecture cannot handle it?

Best regards
Sergio