Comcast contact

Shaw, Matthew mshaw at fairpoint.com
Wed Aug 7 13:54:32 UTC 2013


I agree it's not a lot of bandwidth, but I was grasping at straws at that point finding out about the cross country VoIP arrangement after the fact. For whatever reason, the 711 calls were full of voice clipping and call drops, 729, (with to your point, the lower MOS) worked better as despite not sounding as good, the calls stopped dropping and people's voices were no longer dropping out.

Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Seastrom [mailto:rs at seastrom.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 11:56 PM
To: Shaw, Matthew
Cc: Brandon Galbraith; Andy Ringsmuth; NANOG list
Subject: Re: Comcast contact


"Shaw, Matthew" <mshaw at fairpoint.com> writes:

> Make sure the remote phone is using a low bandwidth codec too. In a 
> previous life changing a remote (home) user's phone from G.711 to
> G.729 made all the difference in the world to their call quality.

i think you've got that backwards.  80 kbit/sec on the wire is not a lot these days, and in a world where we're conditioned to accept gsm or worse, un-transcoded g.711u sounds startlingly good.  if you're so short on bandwidth that moving to a 24 kbit/sec on the wire codec makes a difference, you're on the ragged edge of being hosed.

-r

_______________________________________________________________________


This e-mail message and its attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipients.  They may contain confidential information, legally privileged information or other information subject to legal restrictions.  If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this message or its attachments, notify the sender by replying to this message and delete or destroy all copies of this message and attachments in all media.



More information about the NANOG mailing list