5 Sep
2008
5 Sep
'08
2:22 a.m.
This must be an incredibly dumb question, but why would anyone ever use
mediaproxy over rtpproxy?
If one is written in Python and one in C, it seems to me that the
performance and scalability makes the choice of rtpproxy a no-brainer.
What benefit is there to using mediaproxy? More features and
capabilities, ease of configuration perhaps?
--
Alex Balashov
Evariste Systems
Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599
5 Sep
5 Sep
2:30 a.m.
New subject: [Kamailio-Users] Mediaproxy vs. RTPproxy.
Alex Balashov writes:
If one is written in Python and one in C, it seems to
me that the
performance and scalability makes the choice of rtpproxy a
no-brainer.
alex,
mediaproxy 2.0 is using linux kernel (not python code) to relay media
packets and the claim is close to wire speed performance.
What benefit is there to using mediaproxy? More
features and
capabilities, ease of configuration perhaps?
mediaproxy is easy to use and set up. i don't have experience with
rtpproxy.
unfortunately i just discovered that there may be a serious problem with
mediaproxy 2.0 that was not there in mediaproxy 1.9. looks like
mediaproxy 2.0 does not allow nated ua1 behind one mediaproxy to talk to
nated ua2 behind another mediaproxy. dead lock happens and both
mediaproxies are waiting packets from each other and don't forward
packets that they have received from their uas.
so far i have not got any response to this from the developers.
-- juha
2:39 a.m.
Juha Heinanen wrote:
mediaproxy 2.0 is using linux kernel (not python code)
to relay media
packets and the claim is close to wire speed performance.
Ah, I see. I was following some outdated information on this issue from
Flavio's book.
How does it use the kernel? Some sort of kernel-side module that has
plumbing into the IP routing/forwarding subsystem? Or some sort of ALG
module with hooks?
--
Alex Balashov
Evariste Systems
Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599
2:50 a.m.
Juha Heinanen wrote:
Alex Balashov writes:
Do you have any perspective on how this performs compared to various
high-end commercial SBCs?
I imagine rather favourably, especially since many of them are embedded
systems built on Linux.
--
Alex Balashov
Evariste Systems
Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599
How does it use the kernel? Some sort of
kernel-side module that has
plumbing into the IP routing/forwarding subsystem? Or some sort of ALG
module with hooks?
it uses linux conntrack modules. don't ask me about details.
3 a.m.
Juha Heinanen wrote:
Alex Balashov writes:
Some of them do have ASIC-driven media processing. But many don't, and
are actually just glorified PC hardware.
--
Alex Balashov
Evariste Systems
Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599
Do you have any perspective on how this performs
compared to various
high-end commercial SBCs?
if they don't have any custom hw support to do the forwarding, then i
don't see how they could perform much better on pc hardware.
5961
days inactive
5961
days old
6 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Alex Balashov -
jh＠tutpro.com