Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ASCEND) Am I the only one ??
At 17:13 28/09/98 -0400, Phillip Vandry wrote:
[...]
>> I'll grant you that I don't know all the intimate details of
>> how the line cards in any particular switch work, but I don't
>> think that you can drive the transmitters higher than
>> the raw 56k provided over a CSV channel (Circuit-Switched-Voice),
>> so it shouldn't matter whether the line is ISDN or CT1,
>> a CSV is a CSV is a CSV...
>
>For some reason I was thinking that a voice call would be modulated over
>the full 64K channel whenever such was available end to end, but upon
>thinking about it, I guess that would require a different codec and
>they probably wouldn't have bothered.
>
>So you're probably right.
In North Amerrica etc yes, but my point was that the rest of the world
(which indeed encodes voice over the full 64k, using mu-Law) somehow got
inflicted with the 56k architecture. Consider a MAX with analogue modems
doing traditional analogue modem calls - it's software-switchable between
A-Law and mu-Law - surely the designers of K56/X2/V.90 could have included
this possibility?
It's a minor point and presumably quite separate from the original question
of why we see so much 28.8k (as distinct from <28.8k) on the back-channel
and never >28.8k. In fairness, I've just now found one session running
44k/24k - but it is the first I've seen at <28.8k and if line quality were
an issue then surely we'd be seeing a significant number <28.8k?
Regards,
Neale.
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>