[cisco-voip] IPVC3511, does it suck? or is it me

[IT]

I am very hesitant to purchase the 3511 with EMP, as it is twice the
price.  Will I have to have both the 3511 and 3511-E, or is it enough to
just buy the 3511-E? In addition, I am sorely disappointed with the 3511
w/o EMP, and have yet to hear from someone who has had a good experience
with the 3511. Anyone?

To answer your questions, the 3rd party joins via ad-hoc, and the video
quality immediately gets bad. When the 3rd party is on video with the
voice activation, the quality gets even worse.

I have checked the duplex settings and they are set to 100Mbps/Full
Duplex. Should it be something else?

Is there any other settings I should be looking at?

Thanks,
Avidan

-----Original Message-----
From: MIHI [mailto:mihi at ludens.elte.hu] 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 6:43 AM
To: IT; 'Cisco Voip'
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] IPVC3511, does it suck? or is it me
Importance: Low

Hello Avidan,
 
Without an EMP you can't have continuous presence conferences, just
voice
activated. 

What do you mean on " the second a 3rd party shows up"? Does the 3rd
party
show up in the voice activated way?

Also for VTAs the EMP provides increased display quality because it has
enhanced H.263 codec support. I also recommend to use the latest code on
your MCU, and double check duplex settings.

Marton

________________________________

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of IT
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 11:07 PM
To: Cisco Voip
Subject: [cisco-voip] IPVC3511, does it suck? or is it me



I have an IPVC3511, and I'm using it as an MCU for all my VTA's, so I
have
it just set up as a SCCP mcu,

But, its doesn't allow for all the videos to be on screen at once
(continuous presence requires 3511-E they tell me).

When I do create an ad-hoc conference with meet-me, the second a 3rd
party
shows up, I get terrible resolution problems, the artifacting is
atrocious,
and the video is basically useless.

Does this sound like I have misconfigured the MCU (all 3 callers were on
the
same 10/100 network)?

Or, has anyone found that the IPVC is just a rebadge that just isn't
ready
for prime time?

 

Thanks,

Avidan