From manish.rathi@st.com Wed Sep 29 09:56:36 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ipcdn@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ipcdn@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74A653A6E14 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 09:56:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.188 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.188 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.410, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fjU7fICDccm4 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 09:56:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eu1sys200aog106.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog106.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.121]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 851373A6B4C for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 09:56:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from source ([167.4.1.35]) (using TLSv1) by eu1sys200aob106.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKTKNv6qBZPWUj2XUWTrSR/fhTSvvoHH7T@postini.com; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 16:57:16 UTC Received: from zeta.dmz-us.st.com (ns4.st.com [167.4.80.115]) by beta.dmz-us.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 14979C0 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 16:53:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (safex1hubcas2.st.com [10.75.90.16]) by zeta.dmz-us.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 41A1D4F9 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 16:57:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SAFEX1MAIL1.st.com ([10.75.90.1]) by SAFEX1HUBCAS2.st.com ([10.75.90.16]) with mapi; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 18:56:56 +0200 From: Manish RATHI To: "ipcdn@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 18:56:55 +0200 Thread-Topic: VAD implementation Thread-Index: Actf91JoH5+rFB+ZR0Spokj9rsAaZw== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F8B002B1B3BA5342BA0E4153603A884DD9F3F202D6SAFEX1MAIL1st_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [ipcdn] VAD implementation X-BeenThere: ipcdn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IP over Cable Data Network List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 16:59:21 -0000 --_000_F8B002B1B3BA5342BA0E4153603A884DD9F3F202D6SAFEX1MAIL1st_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, What's the difference in VAD implementation for G.711 described in G.711 Ap= pendix-II and G.711 VAD requirements mentioned in "IMTC voice-over-ip Servi= ce Interoperability Implementation Agreement 1.0" Thanks --_000_F8B002B1B3BA5342BA0E4153603A884DD9F3F202D6SAFEX1MAIL1st_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

What’s the difference in VAD implementation for = G.711 described in G.711 Appendix-II and G.711 VAD requirements mentioned in R= 20;IMTC voice-over-ip Service Interoperability Implementation Agreement 1.0”<= o:p>

 

 

Thanks

--_000_F8B002B1B3BA5342BA0E4153603A884DD9F3F202D6SAFEX1MAIL1st_--