On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 05:32:43PM -0500, Race Vanderdecken wrote: > Thanks Mike, > > I am getting letters from Europe for doing ISUP first, after the > D-Channel and LDAP are working.
LDAP or LAPD? If LAPD, then it would be best to avoid that protocol. It's another level 2 protocol chewing up CPU cycles. Putting a socket on the south end of Q.931 is more appealing. > > Another suggestion has been to create Asterisk as an SG for > other asterisk boxes their by taking load off the Asterisk backend farm. > More info please. > But I think it should run on a single box for the little guys > too. > > The plan is to make the interfaces use sockets to communicate so > that the processes can be migrated off the box if that is needed. > > Remember that Linux can do local host sockets that don't climb > the entire stack so the performance penalty is not that great compared > to the feature set of using sockets. I don't think an Asterisk box can generate enough calls to cause sockets related performance penalties. Five packets per phone call. What's the max call rate an Asterisk box can support? -- Mike _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
