IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: DTMF timing (was Re: [Sip] INFO ...)

"Kevin Attard Compagno" <kampagnol@gmail.com> Thu, 01 November 2007 18:01 UTC

Return-path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IneLp-0004Lz-0h; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:01:05 -0400
Received: from sip by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IneLn-0004Kd-PP for sip-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:01:03 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IneLn-0004Hx-EX for sip@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:01:03 -0400
Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.191]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IneLh-0003Mf-8C for sip@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:01:03 -0400
Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d21so425975nfb for <sip@ietf.org>; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; bh=vLGEGQuYDSWHqosnthmR3k0NplX1c9B+lN8JJLo9JbU=; b=hP3iJOOm+bZf06QkZKapugGNF+o3Fv0Nyy/3XR+9MPn4AA5Ca0tZLy5aH2GuaefacEcf4sgQpLrdQGosMqy8/MdRjivAHRaTv9tTPAtO8Y3i1SqUyZmB4S5pexJsEOFXrswzzUM3l2PZqutjoqHewfpRkkCvpVTadxunM4SwwN4=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; b=dy6IImzNrG40wgfRhPDOlKZw6lV+AZcEh68DyA2hng+K9sHvozywkCzWs0e8dRJTrmYsFw+Wjm1N5pJsXDokkoWeAC9iJPSGeRFI5/356CHW8XXNGpt8MuzDewmr/tEC3EOIEuZhkhBvrWLBsk5IhPyZ49mw/5uQWoTPbX2jWfA=
Received: by 10.78.179.12 with SMTP id b12mr666295huf.1193940035972; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from KACZ61M ( [85.232.206.212]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 39sm1076410hug.2007.11.01.11.00.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:00:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kevin Attard Compagno <kampagnol@gmail.com>
To: sip@ietf.org
References: <8983EC086A9D954BA74D9763E853CF3E04183D84@xmb-rtp-215.amer.cisco.com> <63DAB754-7CAF-48DA-9E47-96905FE45E81@nostrum.com> <9EE99659-BC47-4F29-8C95-652A95D2EF7B@softarmor.com> <EFC02CB0-F640-49D1-8C51-349A909DC9D0@nostrum.com> <20C2BE8C-BBBF-474F-967D-81438FF4EDF0@softarmor.com> <472505F8.5090401@nostrum.com> <8FF0EFA1-77DA-4D68-9B34-2AB904C9ED42@softarmor.com> <47255D1A.30206@nostrum.com> <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC3022B33C132@mail.acmepacket.com> <472756C2.1010205@nostrum.com> <47277440.3050707@cisco.com> <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC3022B33C881@mail.acmepacket.com> <0D5F89FAC29E2C41B98A6A762007F5D037DBFB@GBNTHT12009MSX.gb002.siemens.net> <6A5ECF04-A5D5-494A-8542-79993361AC05@softarmor.com>
In-Reply-To: <6A5ECF04-A5D5-494A-8542-79993361AC05@softarmor.com>
Subject: RE: DTMF timing (was Re: [Sip] INFO ...)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:00:07 +0100
Message-ID: <006d01c81cb1$0ba65b60$22f31220$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
thread-index: AcgcrwilLgMahtJeRXefgbnI8ImiFgAAQj3Q
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org

Apologies for butting in, it's my first post to this list...

My understanding is:

It's not that RFC2833 DTMF delivery arrives quicker that is the point, but that it gets delivered with the rest of the real-time audio inside the RTP stream, timestamped appropriately to insert the tone at the correct point in time within the stream.

---
Kevin Attard Compagno


-----Original Message-----
From: Dean Willis [mailto:dean.willis@softarmor.com] 
Sent: 01 November 2007 18:40
To: Elwell, John
Cc: sip List; Paul Kyzivat; Adam Roach
Subject: DTMF timing (was Re: [Sip] INFO ...)


On Nov 1, 2007, at 6:07 AM, Elwell, John wrote:
> [JRE] Performance is a consideration with DTMF, because the speed with
> which the user receives a response from the server can have impact on
> the user experience. RFC 2833 is always likely to get through quicker.

That's an interesting assertion. While I'm inclined to agree that  
your assertion is likely to prove correct, I'm wondering: Does  
anybody out there have real-world measurements on this?

--
Dean


_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip



_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email