[asterisk-users] Asterisk on a Beagleboard?

[astgroups at comcast.net]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin" <asterisklist at callthem.info> 
To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:01:04 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on a Beagleboard? 

Even PCI has 133MB/s ... so what ? Also isn't USB only target ? It 
doesn't do DMA ... 
so it might be same as PCI Target chips that slow down the CPU 

TDMoE has to have those frames on time all the time forever ... 
these ethernet frames are sent both ways every 1ms 
that might be (or not) too much load on the small CPU 

loose a few frames or deliver late and your voice TDMoE won't work right 

I just speculate here 

Martin 

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 7:56 AM, Jeff LaCoursiere <jeff at jeff.net> wrote: 
> 
> On Wed, 23 Sep 2009, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: 
> 
>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 07:43:51PM -0500, Martin wrote: 
>>> I do not know if fonebridge would work here since it sends/receives 
>>> the ~2 Mbps (for each circuit/port) 
>>> of data over ethernet ... constantly. That could choke the USB ... 
>> 
>> Ethernet has frames. While I'm not exactly sure how ethernet over USB 
>> works and how TDM over Ethernet (MF) works, I would speculate that it is 
>> far from flooding the USB bus. 
>> 
> 
> Even USB 1.1 was 12Mbps. Should be plenty of room for a mere 24 channels 
> of ulaw :) 
> 
> j 

The test we did was actually with 2x T1s worth of calls (48 uLaw calls) on the Beagleboard using the Dual port fonebridge. 
I'm not suggesting this would be a good production quality system. I think a native Ethernet connection and not via a USB adapter would be more efficient but the CPU was able to handle the call volume no problem. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20090923/2215476a/attachment.htm