Dimensioning: What is more CPU intensive OpenSIPS or proxying RTP?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Dimensioning: What is more CPU intensive OpenSIPS or proxying RTP?

Alan Frisch
Looking at deploying a test bed with a couple servers.

Just wondering which is more CPU intensive... the server running
OpenSIPS or the servers proxying the media (no codec translation)?

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dimensioning: What is more CPU intensive OpenSIPS or proxying RTP?

Brett Nemeroff
Well it always really depends on what exactly you are doing. But in general, anything to do with RTP is going to be more CPU intensive. In general, signaling is very little traffic, and a well designed server can do most of it's operations from memory. You'll notice for a typical call, there is next to no signaling that occurs during the call (of course, depending on your implementation)

With RTP, you have a constant stream of packets to sort out, and deal with. Of course, it also depends on what volumes you are talking about.. However I think all in all, RTP is always going to be expensive to work with. That's my $0.02

-Brett


On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Alan Frisch <[hidden email]> wrote:
Looking at deploying a test bed with a couple servers.

Just wondering which is more CPU intensive... the server running
OpenSIPS or the servers proxying the media (no codec translation)?

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users