On Friday 30 March 2007 17:24, Eben King wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, steve szmidt wrote:
> > On Friday 30 March 2007 15:35, Eben King wrote:
> >> A guy on comp.os.linux.hardware pointed me toward
> >> http://www.linuxtoys.org/answer/answering_machine.html which looks like
> >> it'll do what I want. I wish I could do it without 1000 interrupts per
> >> second, however. 8B is an awfully small buffer.
> >
> > Hmm, with Asterisk you don't need 1000 for single calls. Then if you have
> > a card you can use the timer in it, rather than the 1000 interrupts.
> >
> > The only reason you'll need 1000/sec is to try to stabilize the CPU to
> > give voice an even amount of attention. A stripped box with nothing in
> > particular running will handle a couple of lines fine I think.
>
> That's not what I have though. I was hoping to put this on my everyday box
> without too much disruption.
In my experience of having certain functions like that I clearly favor using
dedicated h/w. It allows you to do things with your normal machine without
interrupting your communications (phones and the like).
It's like having a dedicated firewall. Does not matter what I do internally,
it's still there doing its job. Of course I do have a few machines around so
it's not so hard. Still, any old machine will usually do for SOHO type
setups. I've run Asterisk on a 200MHz machine and 20G drive. (Just stay the
hell away from USB TELCO devices. They are nothing short of wast of time.)
--Steve Szmidt
"They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 16:01:30 EDT