|
Home > Archive > Voice over IP Cisco > December 2007 > Moving to G729 - Transcoder Questions
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Moving to G729 - Transcoder Questions
|
|
| STEVEN CASPER 2007-12-20, 1:11 pm |
| We have been using G711 to our branches for IPT and I am now looking at using G729. I am confused as to my transcoder requirements. I would think Iwould need to provision DSP based transcoder resources at the remote locations and also at the central location so G729 would always be used across the WAN. I think that transcoding resources would be required at boththe remote location and the central location for the following scenarios across the WAN link:
Calls to a centralized Unity
Calls to centralized PRI gateways for Long distance calling
Calls to/from IP phones at G711 locations?
Conferencing IP phones and an analog or digital trunk
Does this look correct? For some reason determining when a transcoder is required is proving to be hard for me to grasp. Are there any other scenarios where transcoding would be required?
Thanks!
Steve
Steve Casper
Voice Technologies
M&T Bank
(410) 347-6026
************************************
This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information that is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or entity, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing or using any of the information contained in the transmission.If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic orhard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic personal information about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the servicesfor which you are receiving the information.
There are risks associated with the use of electronic transmission. The sender of this information does not control the method of transmittal or service providers and assumes no duty or obligation for the security, receipt, or third party interception of this transmission.
************************************
| |
| Craig Staffin 2007-12-20, 1:11 pm |
| Steven,
Unity can support G729 as well as all of your endpoints and gateways.
The only time a transcoder would be needed is if you had a call start as
G711 and then get transfered over the WAN thus needing to get transcoded
from G711 to G729 This usually only happens during a conference call.
As far as your long distance calls they will simply get setup as a G729 call
to begin with therefor no need for transcoders.
Craig
On Dec 20, 2007 12:34 PM, STEVEN CASPER <SCASPER@mtb.com> wrote:
> We have been using G711 to our branches for IPT and I am now looking at
> using G729. I am confused as to my transcoder requirements. I would think I
> would need to provision DSP based transcoder resources at the remote
> locations and also at the central location so G729 would always be used
> across the WAN. I think that transcoding resources would be required at both
> the remote location and the central location for the following scenarios
> across the WAN link:
>
> Calls to a centralized Unity
> Calls to centralized PRI gateways for Long distance calling
> Calls to/from IP phones at G711 locations?
> Conferencing IP phones and an analog or digital trunk
>
> Does this look correct? For some reason determining when a transcoder is
> required is proving to be hard for me to grasp. Are there any other
> scenarios where transcoding would be required?
>
> Thanks!
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Steve Casper
> Voice Technologies
> M&T Bank
> (410) 347-6026
>
> ************************************
> This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information that is
> intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended
> recipient or entity, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying,
> distributing or using any of the information contained in the transmission.
> If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic personal information
> about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
> and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or
> disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the services
> for which you are receiving the information.
> There are risks associated with the use of electronic transmission. The
> sender of this information does not control the method of transmittal or
> service providers and assumes no duty or obligation for the security,
> receipt, or third party interception of this transmission.
> ************************************
>
> ________________________________________
_______
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
--
Craig Staffin
Craig@staffin.org
(H) 262-437-7313
(C) 262-613-6003
| |
| Scott Voll 2007-12-20, 1:11 pm |
| As Griag stated, if the device supports G729 that won't be a problem.
the only time it becomes a problem is when you have apps like UCCx that only
support G711. then you need a transcoder next to that app.
We are setup like you. G711 at central site (CM, VGW, Apps, etc) and G729
at remote sites. I have Transcoding resources at the central site so if
they want to use the apps, they can. I also have Conferenece resources at
the central site so that if one party is at the remote site they get a G729
stream while everyone else gets G711.
So if you don't have apps that only support G711 you really don't need
Transcoding. And personally A one point before transcoding resources I just
had them call out the PSTN to our helpdesk which gets you around the G711
issue but in cures Toll charges.
Scott
On Dec 20, 2007 10:44 AM, Craig Staffin <cmstaffin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Steven,
>
> Unity can support G729 as well as all of your endpoints and gateways.
>
> The only time a transcoder would be needed is if you had a call start as
> G711 and then get transfered over the WAN thus needing to get transcoded
> from G711 to G729 This usually only happens during a conference call.
>
> As far as your long distance calls they will simply get setup as a G729
> call to begin with therefor no need for transcoders.
>
> Craig
>
> On Dec 20, 2007 12:34 PM, STEVEN CASPER < SCASPER@mtb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> --
> Craig Staffin
> Craig@staffin.org
> (H) 262-437-7313
> (C) 262-613-6003
> ________________________________________
_______
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
| |
| STEVEN CASPER 2007-12-21, 7:11 am |
| Thanks to all for your feedback. One more question/comment - Our experiencesin the past using g729 have not been positive. Last time we tried to use itwas back in the Nortel days using ITG cards and 9150 remote office devices..Our biggest problem was complaints on a lack of fidelity overall and distortion of higher frequency female and elderly voices. We have not triedthis yet in production using Cisco, I am hoping there has been some improvement. The potential cost reduction on overall bandwidth costs makes it hard to resist.
Steve
[vbcol=seagreen]
As Griag stated, if the device supports G729 that won't be a problem.
the only time it becomes a problem is when you have apps like UCCx that onlysupport G711. then you need a transcoder next to that app.
We are setup like you. G711 at central site (CM, VGW, Apps, etc) and G729 at remote sites. I have Transcoding resources at the central site so if they want to use the apps, they can. I also have Conferenece resources at the central site so that if one party is at the remote site they get a G729stream while everyone else gets G711.
So if you don't have apps that only support G711 you really don't need Transcoding. And personally A one point before transcoding resources I justhad them call out the PSTN to our helpdesk which gets you around the G711 issue but in cures Toll charges.
Scott
On Dec 20, 2007 10:44 AM, Craig Staffin <cmstaffin@gmail.com> wrote:
Steven,
Unity can support G729 as well as all of your endpoints and gateways.
The only time a transcoder would be needed is if you had a call start as G711 and then get transfered over the WAN thus needing to get transcoded from G711 to G729 This usually only happens during a conference call.
As far as your long distance calls they will simply get setup as a G729 callto begin with therefor no need for transcoders.
Craig
On Dec 20, 2007 12:34 PM, STEVEN CASPER < SCASPER@mtb.com> wrote:
We have been using G711 to our branches for IPT and I am now looking at using G729. I am confused as to my transcoder requirements. I would think Iwould need to provision DSP based transcoder resources at the remote locations and also at the central location so G729 would always be used across the WAN. I think that transcoding resources would be required at boththe remote location and the central location for the following scenarios across the WAN link:
Calls to a centralized Unity
Calls to centralized PRI gateways for Long distance calling
Calls to/from IP phones at G711 locations?
Conferencing IP phones and an analog or digital trunk
Does this look correct? For some reason determining when a transcoder is required is proving to be hard for me to grasp. Are there any other scenarios where transcoding would be required?
Thanks!
Steve
Steve Casper
Voice Technologies
M&T Bank
(410) 347-6026
************************************
This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information that is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or entity, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing or using any of the information contained in the transmission.If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic orhard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic personal information about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the servicesfor which you are receiving the information.
There are risks associated with the use of electronic transmission. The sender of this information does not control the method of transmittal or service providers and assumes no duty or obligation for the security, receipt, or third party interception of this transmission.
************************************
________________________________________
_______
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
--
Craig Staffin
Craig@staffin.org
(H) 262-437-7313
(C) 262-613-6003
________________________________________
_______
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
************************************
This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information that is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or entity, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing or using any of the information contained in the transmission.If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic orhard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic personal information about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the servicesfor which you are receiving the information.
There are risks associated with the use of electronic transmission. The sender of this information does not control the method of transmittal or service providers and assumes no duty or obligation for the security, receipt, or third party interception of this transmission.
************************************
| |
| zohaib shabir 2007-12-21, 1:11 pm |
| Steve,
I have been using G.729a in production in two different setups(one of them
is two years old) and never had Voice Quality issues with Call Manager. I
have used in both CCM 4.0,4.2 and Voice gateway 2621XM, 3845 and AS 5400XM.
As far as my experience is concerned no problems in cisco G.729.
On Dec 21, 2007 6:05 PM, STEVEN CASPER <SCASPER@mtb.com> wrote:
> Thanks to all for your feedback. One more question/comment - Our
> experiences in the past using g729 have not been positive. Last time we
> tried to use it was back in the Nortel days using ITG cards and 9150 remote
> office devices. Our biggest problem was complaints on a lack of fidelity
> overall and distortion of higher frequency female and elderly voices. We
> have not tried this yet in production using Cisco, I am hoping there has
> been some improvement. The potential cost reduction on overall bandwidth
> costs makes it hard to resist.
>
> Steve
>
> As Griag stated, if the device supports G729 that won't be a problem.
>
> the only time it becomes a problem is when you have apps like UCCx that
> only support G711. then you need a transcoder next to that app.
>
> We are setup like you. G711 at central site (CM, VGW, Apps, etc) and G729
> at remote sites. I have Transcoding resources at the central site so if
> they want to use the apps, they can. I also have Conferenece resources at
> the central site so that if one party is at the remote site they get a G729
> stream while everyone else gets G711.
>
> So if you don't have apps that only support G711 you really don't need
> Transcoding. And personally A one point before transcoding resources I just
> had them call out the PSTN to our helpdesk which gets you around the G711
> issue but in cures Toll charges.
>
> Scott
>
> On Dec 20, 2007 10:44 AM, Craig Staffin <cmstaffin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> ************************************
> This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information that is
> intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended
> recipient or entity, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying,
> distributing or using any of the information contained in the transmission.
> If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic personal information
> about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
> and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or
> disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the services
> for which you are receiving the information.
> There are risks associated with the use of electronic transmission. The
> sender of this information does not control the method of transmittal or
> service providers and assumes no duty or obligation for the security,
> receipt, or third party interception of this transmission.
> ************************************
>
> ________________________________________
_______
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
--
Regards,
Zohaib Shabir
Network Engineer(Voice)
DWP Group, TECH Division Karachi
Ph:+92-302-8232689
| |
| Jonathan Charles 2007-12-22, 1:11 pm |
| Well, there is an issue with g729 and MOH, cuz the codec was designed
for voice, the quality for music tends to be a bit poor... though I
have never noticed a problem...
Jonathan
On Dec 21, 2007 7:17 AM, zohaib shabir <zohaibshabir@gmail.com> wrote:
> Steve,
> I have been using G.729a in production in two different setups(one of them
> is two years old) and never had Voice Quality issues with Call Manager. I
> have used in both CCM 4.0,4.2 and Voice gateway 2621XM, 3845 and AS 5400XM.
> As far as my experience is concerned no problems in cisco G.729.
>
>
>
> On Dec 21, 2007 6:05 PM, STEVEN CASPER <SCASPER@mtb.com> wrote:
> experiences in the past using g729 have not been positive. Last time we
> tried to use it was back in the Nortel days using ITG cards and 9150 remote
> office devices. Our biggest problem was complaints on a lack of fidelity
> overall and distortion of higher frequency female and elderly voices. We
> have not tried this yet in production using Cisco, I am hoping there has
> been some improvement. The potential cost reduction on overall bandwidth
> costs makes it hard to resist.
> only support G711. then you need a transcoder next to that app.
> at remote sites. I have Transcoding resources at the central site so if
> they want to use the apps, they can. I also have Conferenece resources at
> the central site so that if one party is at the remote site they get a G729
> stream while everyone else gets G711.
> Transcoding. And personally A one point before transcoding resources I just
> had them call out the PSTN to our helpdesk which gets you around the G711
> issue but in cures Toll charges.
> G711 and then get transfered over the WAN thus needing to get transcoded
> from G711 to G729 This usually only happens during a conference call.
> call to begin with therefor no need for transcoders.
> at using G729. I am confused as to my transcoder requirements. I would think
> I would need to provision DSP based transcoder resources at the remote
> locations and also at the central location so G729 would always be used
> across the WAN. I think that transcoding resources would be required at both
> the remote location and the central location for the following scenarios
> across the WAN link:
> is required is proving to be hard for me to grasp. Are there any other
> scenarios where transcoding would be required?
> is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended
> recipient or entity, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying,
> distributing or using any of the information contained in the transmission.
> If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic personal information
> about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
> and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or
> disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the services
> for which you are receiving the information.
> The sender of this information does not control the method of transmittal or
> service providers and assumes no duty or obligation for the security,
> receipt, or third party interception of this transmission.
> intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended
> recipient or entity, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying,
> distributing or using any of the information contained in the transmission.
> If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic personal information
> about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
> and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or
> disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the services
> for which you are receiving the information.
> sender of this information does not control the method of transmittal or
> service providers and assumes no duty or obligation for the security,
> receipt, or third party interception of this transmission.
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Zohaib Shabir
> Network Engineer(Voice)
> DWP Group, TECH Division Karachi
> Ph:+92-302-8232689
> ________________________________________
_______
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
| |
| Vince Loschiavo 2007-12-25, 1:11 pm |
| True, sending music over G.729 sux....but....you can use the local
router as a MOH server (moh file on router's flash).
________________________________________
____________________
Vincent Loschiavo
Cisco Practice Director
Datacorp
18503 Pines Blvd
Suite 213
Pembroke Pines, FL, 33029
"Cisco Advanced Unified Communications Partner"
Cell Phone: 786-282-1164
Office Phone: 954-671-5669
Office Main: 305-594-6933
________________________________________
____________________
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jonathan
Charles
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 12:33 PM
To: zohaib shabir
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net; STEVEN CASPER
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Moving to G729 - Transcoder Questions
Well, there is an issue with g729 and MOH, cuz the codec was designed
for voice, the quality for music tends to be a bit poor... though I
have never noticed a problem...
Jonathan
On Dec 21, 2007 7:17 AM, zohaib shabir <zohaibshabir@gmail.com> wrote:
> Steve,
> I have been using G.729a in production in two different setups(one of
them
> is two years old) and never had Voice Quality issues with Call
Manager. I
> have used in both CCM 4.0,4.2 and Voice gateway 2621XM, 3845 and AS
5400XM.
> As far as my experience is concerned no problems in cisco G.729.
>
>
>
> On Dec 21, 2007 6:05 PM, STEVEN CASPER <SCASPER@mtb.com> wrote:
> experiences in the past using g729 have not been positive. Last time
we
> tried to use it was back in the Nortel days using ITG cards and 9150
remote
> office devices. Our biggest problem was complaints on a lack of
fidelity
> overall and distortion of higher frequency female and elderly voices.
We
> have not tried this yet in production using Cisco, I am hoping there
has
> been some improvement. The potential cost reduction on overall
bandwidth
> costs makes it hard to resist.
problem.[vbcol=seagreen]
that[vbcol=seagreen]
> only support G711. then you need a transcoder next to that app.
and G729[vbcol=seagreen]
> at remote sites. I have Transcoding resources at the central site so
if
> they want to use the apps, they can. I also have Conferenece
resources at
> the central site so that if one party is at the remote site they get a
G729
> stream while everyone else gets G711.
need[vbcol=seagreen]
> Transcoding. And personally A one point before transcoding resources
I just
> had them call out the PSTN to our helpdesk which gets you around the
G711
> issue but in cures Toll charges.
gateways.[vbcol=seagreen]
start as[vbcol=seagreen]
> G711 and then get transfered over the WAN thus needing to get
transcoded
> from G711 to G729 This usually only happens during a conference call.
G729[vbcol=seagreen]
> call to begin with therefor no need for transcoders.
looking[vbcol=seagreen]
> at using G729. I am confused as to my transcoder requirements. I would
think
> I would need to provision DSP based transcoder resources at the remote
> locations and also at the central location so G729 would always be
used
> across the WAN. I think that transcoding resources would be required
at both
> the remote location and the central location for the following
scenarios
> across the WAN link:
transcoder[vbcol=seagreen]
> is required is proving to be hard for me to grasp. Are there any other
> scenarios where transcoding would be required?
information that[vbcol=seagreen]
> is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the
intended
> recipient or entity, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing,
copying,
> distributing or using any of the information contained in the
transmission.
> If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether
electronic or
> hard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic personal
information
> about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley
Act
> and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse
or
> disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the
services
> for which you are receiving the information.
transmission.[vbcol=seagreen]
> The sender of this information does not control the method of
transmittal or
> service providers and assumes no duty or obligation for the security,
> receipt, or third party interception of this transmission.
that is[vbcol=seagreen]
> intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the
intended
> recipient or entity, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing,
copying,
> distributing or using any of the information contained in the
transmission.
> If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether
electronic or
> hard copy. This communication may contain nonpublic personal
information
> about consumers subject to the restrictions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley
Act
> and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. You may not directly or indirectly reuse
or
> disclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the
services
> for which you are receiving the information.
The[vbcol=seagreen]
> sender of this information does not control the method of transmittal
or
> service providers and assumes no duty or obligation for the security,
> receipt, or third party interception of this transmission.
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Zohaib Shabir
> Network Engineer(Voice)
> DWP Group, TECH Division Karachi
> Ph:+92-302-8232689
> ________________________________________
_______
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
________________________________________
_______
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
|
|
|
|
|