Thanks -----Original Message----- From: sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org] On Behalf Of Alex Balashov Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2013 1:55 PM To: sr-users@lists.sip-router.org Subject: Re: [SR-Users] rtpproxy virtual or physical machine
On 05/01/2013 07:44 AM, Grant Bagdasarian wrote: > Hello, > > I understand that machines processing RTP are recommended to be > physical machines. Does the same apply for machines just proxy'ing RTP? > > Also, after how many RTP session would you start noticing issues with > RTP when using rtpproxy on a virtual VMware machine? There is no firm answer to that, but there seems to be widespread consensus that something like 'rtpproxy', especially being a user space process, benefits from access to native hardware, versus the jittery and unreliable intermediated I/O scheduling and contention inside a VM environment. -- Alex -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 235 E Ponce de Leon Ave Suite 106 Decatur, GA 30030 United States Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/ _______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users _______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
