[cisco-voip] IPIPGW

[Mark Holloway]

It sounded like you were connecting an E1 to a TDM device and trunking IP upstream.  If you're running like-for-like codecs and you're 100% IP then you don't need a PVDM module.

On Nov 22, 2009, at 2:45 PM, Ali El Moussaoui wrote:

> thanks for your answers I think Nicks answer is the one am looking for since i am doing H323-H323 no need for DSPs. 
> 
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 11:22 PM, Nick Matthews <matthnick at gmail.com> wrote:
> More importantly - if you're not transcoding, you don't need the PVDM
> at all for an IPIPGW.  Be sure that we're talking about a SIP-SIP,
> SIP-H323, or H323-H323 connection when you say IPIPGW, which I'm
> assuming is correct here.  No voice termination, transcoding, or
> conferencing?  Don't need DSPs.
> 
> -nick
> 
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Mark Holloway <mh at markholloway.com> wrote:
> > PVDM2-64 will handle 32 G729 medium complexity calls.  PVDM2-32 will handle 16.  PVDM2-16 will handle 8.  You get the idea.
> >
> >
> > On Nov 22, 2009, at 12:25 PM, Ali El Moussaoui wrote:
> >
> >> Hello Group,
> >>
> >> I am a silent watcher and this is my first post. I am planning a setup for an IPIPGW. The requirements state that the gteway must handle a full E1. My question is: how many PVDM2-64 I need? 1 or 2? note that i will be using G729 (medium complexity).
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Ali
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cisco-voip mailing list
> >> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20091122/a5a81c55/attachment.html>