[cisco-voip] Transcoding/Conferencing on the same ISDN Gateway

[Rhodium]

Hi Peter,

Thank you for your reply.

I dug out a report from Cisco Advanced Services that stated that CUBEs should only be used for SIP trunks and not for transcoding/mtp. Knew I read something somewhere. Just not the details... :)

So we are all definite that for an ISDN GW, we can use re-use the DSPs for transcoding in line with Cisco's recommendations? I want to recommend getting a dedicated router for these functions but need to justify the cost so if there are no design recommendations, then I guess I can just put it all on one box.

Regards,

J


--- On Wed, 2/10/10, Peter Slow <peter.slow at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Peter Slow <peter.slow at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Transcoding/Conferencing on the same ISDN Gateway
> To: "Rhodium" <rhodium_uk at yahoo.co.uk>
> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2010, 5:02 PM
> That is not necessarily correct. It
> depends heavily on the type of
> gateway you're talking about, and the number of transcoding
> or
> conferencing sessions you might be needing.
> 
> -peter
> 
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Rhodium <rhodium_uk at yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > Hi Experts, :)
> >
> > I am sure I read somewhere in a design doc or the SRND
> that it is not advocated to put transcoding or conferencing
> resources on a voice gateway handling about 150 calls.
> >
> > Am I recalling right or are the old brain cells
> getting weaker with age.
> >
> > If that is correct, a link would be appreciated as I
> can't find it.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
>