PhoneBoy
I Am
join:2002-01-02
Gig Harbor, WA | reply to Automate
Re: [Broadvox Direct] Broadvox and BroadVoice join
The new CPE is supposed to do T.38 (that means it should support fax properly) and QoS. |
|
roamer1
sticking it out at you
join:2001-03-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| said by PhoneBoy  :
The new CPE is supposed to do T.38 (that means it should support fax properly) and QoS.
The Sipura SPA-2000 already sends out QoS bits... (they show up in tcpdump, and I use them to prioritize traffic in iptables)
-SC
--
No-Bull SE US Wireless Info: »www.sewireless.info/
Atlanta Apt/Condo Cable & Broadband Info: »www.atlaptcable.info/ |
|
Neutron1998
join:2004-03-25
Princeton, TX | which codec is 30kpbs?
I'm on a 128kbps upload so this is important to me.
I wish G.723.1 was a standard that more than one VoIP company uses. |
|
PhoneBoy
I Am
join:2002-01-02
Gig Harbor, WA
| reply to roamer1
said by roamer1 :
The Sipura SPA-2000 already sends out QoS bits... (they show up in tcpdump, and I use them to prioritize traffic in iptables)
As do I. Thank you, Wondershaper.
Broadvox Direct's new device will be more like the Motorola device, i.e. a router instead of just a SIP endpoint. From that standpoint, QoS takes on a different meaning...
-- PhoneBoy
--
The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of anyone else, including the poster. |
|
bfbchief
join:2003-07-01
0628 | Is BVD going to upgrade our devices? OR will this be for new customers ONLY? |
|
sesat
Premium
join:2003-12-16
Oakland, CA
| reply to Neutron1998
said by Neutron1998 :
which codec is 30kpbs?
g.729 is around 30kbps inclusive of IP overhead.
said by PhoneBoy :
G.729 sounds a bit better and, at least to me, barely distinguishable from G.711.
|
|
ieee1394
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Washington
 ·TowerStream
| reply to PhoneBoy
said by PhoneBoy :
The new CPE is supposed to do T.38 (that means it should support fax properly) and QoS.
The T.38 is good. As someone else mentioned: will there be an upgrade path for current subscribers? I have two Broadvox SPA2000's right now. As for the QoS, I'll pass on that if it's going to be another one of these solutions where the adapter has to go in front of my router. That won't work anyway for someone that has more than one VOIP adapter. |
|
neftv
join:2000-10-01
Broomall, PA
 ·Broadvox Direct
1 edit | T.38 sounds good to me if it can handle modem connections (dish network receiver). Where can I find more info on this standard? Since Broadvox owns the SPA I hope they would replace it if necessary to support the standard with all the customers if the SPA is not upgradeable to T.38.
**edit**
I found doing a google search what the T.38 is about at »www.intel.com/network/csp/resour···1web.htm |
|
PhoneBoy
I Am
join:2002-01-02
Gig Harbor, WA
| reply to bfbchief
The presumption is that it will be handled similar to how Vonage and Voicepulse handled similar transitions away from the Cisco ATA-186, i.e. you'll have to pay a small fee to swap the device. However, I don't have any knowledge one way or the other.
-- PhoneBoy
--
The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of anyone else, including the poster. |
|
bfbchief
join:2003-07-01
0628 | Thanks Phoneboy...That is better than nothing!!!! |
|
ieee1394
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Washington
·TowerStream
| reply to neftv
said by neftv :
T.38 sounds good to me if it can handle modem connections (dish network receiver).
T.38 is for faxing only.
Also, looking back at my Vonage usage, it looks like Dish doesn't work at all with Vonage anymore either. I'm thinking they may have changed something in the firmware that they pushed at the end of 2003. |
|
