<div dir="ltr"><div>I think they mean modified CS-ACELP codec based on g.729.</div><div>50 simultaneously channels is low number on quad core I7, even using ITU reference implementation.</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/5/17 Steve Underwood <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:steveu@coppice.org" target="_blank">steveu@coppice.org</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On 05/17/2013 10:54 AM, Fernando Hernandez wrote:<br>
> Thanks a lot to both for your advice, it has been really useful.<br>
><br>
> Stephen, yes, I am referring to BBB. And I have a question, as far as<br>
> BBB is not limited by software and we need to run conference larger<br>
> than 25 we need to scale the hardware. But, I would like to know about<br>
> the possibility to distribute BBB across multiple servers, how can we<br>
> do it? do you know if there is any documentation about it?<br>
><br>
> And about Misheshu comments, I think the licence issue will be a<br>
> problem. The implementation of G.729 I am talking about is<br>
> proprietary, not open at all, so we need to find out if it is possible<br>
> to use it with FreeSWITCH (I am not well versed on the licensing<br>
> issues, so I will read the licenses and try to understand them).<br>
> You can check this comparison table to have an idea about this codec<br>
> performance,<br>
><br>
</div><div class="im">> Imágenes integradas 1<br>
><br>
> And finally, about audio transcoding. We use BBB and speex for the<br>
> encoding, but as Stephen said before, maybe the audio is not the only<br>
> problem we have. We need to run more tests...<br>
><br>
> Thank you very much and best regards,<br>
><br>
> Fernando Hernandez.<br>
</div>What is this table supposed to indicate? u-law, A-law and most forms of<br>
ADPCM (the table doesn't indicate which one) are only designed for use<br>
at 8k samples/second, and give poor results when used at higher rates.<br>
G.729 can *only* be used at 8k samples/second. Its just useless at<br>
higher sample rates. If "capacity" is supposed to be the number of<br>
channels of the codec which can be supported on an i7-2720QM why is the<br>
number for G.729 so low? Even a poor implementation should be faster<br>
than 50 channels on a quad core processor like that. The G.729 for<br>
Freeswitch is certainly a lot faster than 148 channels on such a processor.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Steve<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
_________________________________________________________________________<br>
Professional FreeSWITCH Consulting Services:<br>
<a href="mailto:consulting@freeswitch.org">consulting@freeswitch.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.freeswitchsolutions.com" target="_blank">http://www.freeswitchsolutions.com</a><br>
<br>
FreeSWITCH-powered IP PBX: The CudaTel Communication Server<br>
<a href="http://www.cudatel.com" target="_blank">http://www.cudatel.com</a><br>
<br>
Official FreeSWITCH Sites<br>
<a href="http://www.freeswitch.org" target="_blank">http://www.freeswitch.org</a><br>
<a href="http://wiki.freeswitch.org" target="_blank">http://wiki.freeswitch.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.cluecon.com" target="_blank">http://www.cluecon.com</a><br>
<br>
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org">FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users" target="_blank">http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users</a><br>
UNSUBSCRIBE:<a href="http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users" target="_blank">http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users</a><br>
<a href="http://www.freeswitch.org" target="_blank">http://www.freeswitch.org</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>