[asterisk-users] Asterisk codec strangeness

[Mojo with Horan & Company, LLC]

are your codec allow= statements in the same order in each peer block?
meaning does peerA have g729 at a different priority than peerB?

Moj

Jean-Michel Hiver wrote:
> Jean-Michel Hiver a écrit :
> 
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I have two peers (call then peerA and peerB) on my server, both can 
>> accept g711, g729 and g723. However, when peerA initiates a request, 
>> asterisk decides to transcode g729 into ulaw when peerB could very 
>> well use g729...
>>
>> This behavior isn't very scalable (transcoding is CPU expensive) and 
>> also it's better to minimize the amount of transcoding wherever 
>> possible. Is there a way I can fix this?
>>
>> NB: if i set disallow = all and allow=g729 on peerB it all works fine, 
>> but then if peerA decides to send ulaw I'm transcoding again...
> 
> Okay, I have digged the archives a bit, and apparently I'm not the only 
> one having this problem. I am thinking of maybe sorting out this problem 
> by having:
> 
> [peerA-g711]
> type=peer
> host=123.123.123.123
> disallow=all
> allow=ulaw
> allow=alaw
> 
> [peerA-g729]
> type=peer
> host=123.123.123.123
> disallow=all
> allow=g729
> 
> [peerA-g723]
> type=peer
> host=123.123.123.123
> disallow=all
> allow=g723
> 
> And then using ${SIP_CODEC} to route the call correctly maybe?
> 
> I don't think having multiple peers with the same IP address would be a 
> big deal for outgoing calls, but asterisk will probably we confused for 
> incoming calls from 123.123.123.123... what do you think?
> 
> Cheers,
> Jean-Michel.
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
> 
> asterisk-users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> 
> !DSPAM:500,44f4a435224481596210392!
> 

-- 
Mojo <mojo at horanappraisals.com>
Office Manager, Horan & Company, LLC
(907) 747-6666 x112