From: Carlos G Mendioroz (tron@huapi.ba.ar)
Date: Fri Aug 13 2004 - 10:53:05 GMT-3
If that's the case, CME's implementation of RTP is non conformant...
Scott Morris wrote:
> Very true. But again, the RFC for RTP operations specifies that RTCP must
> also be used. So regardless of the initiating protocol (although I believe
> we started talking H.323, hence the reference), the end result for what
> appears SHOULD be the same...
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Carlos G Mendioroz
> Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 9:29 AM
> To: swm@emanon.com
> Cc: 'Richard Dumoulin'; 'lab'
> Subject: Re: qos for voice
>
> Scott,
> the part of your "insanity" comes from associating Voip to H323 :-) Voip can
> also use SIP, MGCP, SCCP, etc as call control.
> All of them use RTP for voice transport.
> CCM and CME both use SCCP (aka skinny) to do call control to Voip phones...
>
> Scott Morris wrote:
>
>>According to RFC 3550, all participants in an H.323 conversation
>>(which is your two endpoints, being IP phones or routers with FXS
>>ports) MUST send RTCP. Therefore, H.323 voice ALWAYS works in pairs
>>of ports (which is good to know that I am not going insane, at least
>>not for this part!)
>>
>>:)
>>
>>HTH,
>>
>>
>>Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
>>CISSP, JNCIP, et al.
>>IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
>>IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
>>swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
>>http://www.ipexpert.net <http://www.ipexpert.net/>
>>
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>From: Richard Dumoulin [mailto:richard.dumoulin@vanco.es]
>>Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 6:06 AM
>>To: Carlos G Mendioroz; Scott Morris
>>Cc: 'lab'
>>Subject: RE: qos for voice
>>
>>There's no RTCP between the ephones and CME but there is between the
>>Voice gateways I think, no ?
>>
>>--Richard
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Carlos G Mendioroz [mailto:tron@huapi.ba.ar]
>>Sent: viernes, 13 de agosto de 2004 11:35
>>To: Scott Morris
>>Cc: 'Steven A Ridder'; 'John Matus'; 'lab'
>>Subject: Re: qos for voice
>>
>>
>>Scott Morris wrote:
>>
>> > Actually, voice streams use a pair of ports (even and odd) for RTP
>>and > RTCP stuff (voice data and control).
>>
>>This depends on what the endpoints are.
>>Although true for CCM, this does not hold, e.g., for CME to Voip phone
>>AFAIK. No RTCP there.
>>
>> >
>> > The rtp priority command with "16384 16383" numbers isn't a range.
>>In > that command, it's the starting port and number of ports >
>>(16384+16383=32767) whereas the other command actually is a range with
>>
>>>start and stop information.
>>
>> >
>> > HTH,
>> >
>> > Scott
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
>>Behalf > Of Steven A Ridder > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 8:57
>>PM > To: 'John Matus'; swm@emanon.com; 'lab'
>> > Subject: RE: qos for voice
>> >
>> > The difference between the 1st and 2nd statement is as follows:
>> >
>> > The first statement (the udp 16384...) matched the payload and >
>>signal/control traffic where the "IP RTP" statement captures the data
>>
>>>packets only. The first statement ensures that ALL RTP traffic >
>>
>>(payload and > signal) packets get matched. If I remember correctly,
>>each RTP stream uses > 4 consecutive ports, starting with the first
>>even port above 16384, so the > first stream uses 16384-16387. It's
>>been a while, but I think that's > correct.
>> >
>> > Steve Ridder
>> >
>> >
>> > -- RFC 1049 Compliant
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
>>Behalf > Of John Matus > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 8:08 PM >
>>To: swm@emanon.com; 'lab'
>> > Subject: Re: qos for voice
>> >
>> > i have no idea if it is working........it's a lab scenario >
>> > i wasn't sure if the 'match rtp' somehow included the tcp 1720. i
>>really
>> > don't understand the difference between the two statements or why
>>or > why not they would be used. any insite you could give would be
>>most > helpful!
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com> > To: "'John Matus'"
>><jmatus@pacbell.net>; "'lab'"
>> > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>> > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 4:36 PM > Subject: RE: qos for
>>voice > > > >>Well, off the cuff, it would appear that you aren't
>>matching the H225 >>call setup (tcp/1720) in your second class.
>>Otherwise, you are either >>matching on the RTP header or the UDP
>>header information.
>> >>
>> >>Do they both work for you? ;)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
>>
>>>>CISSP, JNCIP, et al. IPExpert CCIE Program Manager >>IPExpert Sr.
>>>
>>Technical Instructor >>swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
>> >>http://www.ipexpert.net
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
>>Behalf >>Of > > John > >>Matus
>> >>Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 6:29 PM
>> >>To: lab
>> >>Subject: qos for voice
>> >>
>> >>is there a difference between the following??
>> >>
>> >>class-map match-all voip
>> >>match access-group 101
>> >>
>> >>access-list 101 permit tcp any any 1720 >>access-list 101 permit
>>udp any any range 16384 32787 >> >>AND >> >>class-map match-all
>>voip >>match ip rtp 16384 16383 >> >> >>do they perform the same
>>function or are they completely different.
>> >>i'm confused :)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>John D. Matus
>> >>MCSE, CCNP
>> >>Office: 818-782-2061
>> >>Cell: 818-430-8372
>> >>jmatus@pacbell.net
>> >>
>>
>>
>>>>____________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>__
>> >>_
>> >>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>> >>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>> >>
>> >>Subscription information may be found at:
>> >>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>______________________________________________________________________
>> > _
>> > Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>> > http://shop.groupstudy.com
>> >
>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>> >
>> >
>>______________________________________________________________________
>> > _
>> > Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>> > http://shop.groupstudy.com
>> >
>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>> >
>> >
>>______________________________________________________________________
>> > _
>> > Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>> > http://shop.groupstudy.com
>> >
>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>> >
>>
>>--
>>Carlos G Mendioroz <tron@huapi.ba.ar> LW7 EQI Argentina
>>
>>______________________________________________________________________
>>_ Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials
>>from:
>>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>>
>>Subscription information may be found at:
>>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>**********************************************************************
>>Any opinions expressed in the email are those of the individual and
>>not necessarily the company. This email and any files transmitted with
>>it are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
>>If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for
>>delivering it to the intended recipient, be advised that you have
>>received this email in error and that any dissemination, distribution,
>>copying or use is strictly prohibited.
>>
>>If you have received this email in error, or if you are concerned with
>>the content of this email please e-mail to:
>>e-security.support@vanco.info
>>
>>The contents of an attachment to this e-mail may contain software
>>viruses which could damage your own computer system. While the sender
>>has taken every reasonable precaution to minimise this risk, we cannot
>>accept liability for any damage which you sustain as a result of
>>software viruses. You should carry out your own virus checks before
>>opening any attachments to this e-mail.
>>**********************************************************************
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos G Mendioroz <tron@huapi.ba.ar>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
> http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
-- Carlos G Mendioroz <tron@huapi.ba.ar>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 03 2004 - 07:02:43 GMT-3