08-14-2001 03:19 PM - edited 03-12-2019 12:15 PM
Hello Chris and all
I'm currently in the design stages on a pretty cool
project. I have 7 remote sites and one central site.
These remote sites are all point-to-point links.
Essentially I have 7 T1's terminating at the hub site. (DS3 is not available)
The customer is currently utilizing H.320 legacy video equipment on three of his locations, as well as interfacing via 28 FX0's and 22 FXS's to the hub site PBX. The remote sites have various flavors of FX0's and FXS type connections to the remote site key systems.
I'm going with IP/H323 on the voice and video. Using 3600s on all sites (too many FXOs & FXSs) I'm planning on using the 3530's for the legacy H320 conversion and the 3510 for the MCU and the MCM/proxy at each site for the QOS tagging and ip rtp priority queuing for the queuing.
My question is:
Wouldn't the video H323 also use this same priority queuing mechanism as the voice? (Since theyre both H323) Is this the best queuing mechanism to use?
Would LLQ be a better alternative? And will LLQ work with both
the voice and the video? What's the best QOS to use?
I want to make sure, I'm applying the best QOS solution that will work with both services. (voice & Video)
Thank You
Hank
08-20-2001 02:04 PM
09-06-2001 07:16 AM
Can someone please post an answer to his questions please, instead of links. Thanks, Dylan sends
09-06-2001 10:29 AM
The recommended solution is to use 2 separate LLQs for voice and video-confernecing traffic. Having voice and VC co-exist on the same LLQ can be disruptive as video packets have much higher variability in size than does voice-only and uses more variable bandwidth in the context of the call. Also recommended is using Prec 5 for voice and 4 for for the video conference traffic. RSVP would also be helpful to reserve b/w and determine path in a multi-hop environment. Hope this helps.
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: