Depends on whether you want to provide a quality product or not. ?G.729 already hovers just above the line of "satisfied". ?The slightest impairment drives that below what is considered acceptable. ?I wouldn't deploy it. ? From: Robert Johnson <robert.j at bendtel.com> To: voiceops at voiceops.org Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 5:43 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] G.729 A/B Experiences Hey everyone, I'm looking to deploy a lower-bandwidth codec, and am wondering what everyone's experience has been with G.729, primary regarding voice quality. Historically, we have limited our codec use to G.711. Some test calls in the lab are showing promising results, I'm just curious what might happen in the real-world. Thank you for your time!! -- Robert Johnson BendTel, Inc. (541)389-4020 Central Oregon's Own Telephone and Internet Service Provider www.bendtel.com/about/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops Sent from Yahoo Mail From: Robert Johnson <robert.j at bendtel.com> To: voiceops at voiceops.org Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 5:43 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] G.729 A/B Experiences Hey everyone, I'm looking to deploy a lower-bandwidth codec, and am wondering what everyone's experience has been with G.729, primary regarding voice quality. Historically, we have limited our codec use to G.711. Some test calls in the lab are showing promising results, I'm just curious what might happen in the real-world. Thank you for your time!! -- Robert Johnson BendTel, Inc. (541)389-4020 Central Oregon's Own Telephone and Internet Service Provider www.bendtel.com/about/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops