[69146] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Overflow circuit
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven M. Bellovin)
Sat Mar 27 22:36:28 2004
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>
To: "Alexei Roudnev" <alex@relcom.net>
Cc: "Michel Py" <michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 27 Mar 2004 19:30:07 PST."
<05f001c41474$f8ae7080$6401a8c0@alexh>
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 22:33:29 -0500
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
In message <05f001c41474$f8ae7080$6401a8c0@alexh>, "Alexei Roudnev" writes:
>It means, that satellite (with it's 1 second delay and unavoidable echo)
>should be better accepted for _profeccionsl_ phone connection (such as, for
>example, connection between remote oil wells and central office), because
>you can always stay with delay, if follow some talking discippline (and it
>is better than trunking radio, anyway), while it will be less acceptable for
>home / residential users.
>
>Delay (by itself) does not influence voice quaility, but it required strick
>talking discipline / policy to avoid misunderstanding, echo and so on. We
>can expect such discipline from professional workers, but you never expect
>it from your 5 y.old kid.
Fair enough. I should add one more thing: with that sort of delay,
you need good echo cancellers. If you're getting echo, they're not
good enough, I suspect...
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb
