TelePresence Server 8710 VAD

[Gonzalo Gasca Meza]

We have Audio only participants, when we have 3+ callers, is there a way to configure TPS not to forward audio packets to others when participants are not talking?           

Today we receive silence in G711.

[ahmashar]

have you tried muting the audio?

see page 72 of this website

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/telepresence/infrastructure/ts/user_guide/Cisco_TelePresence_Server_2-2_Product_user_guide.pdf

regards, Ahmad

[Nick Halbert-Lillyman]

I think he means voice activation detection - i.e. don't send audio packets if nobody is talking (as a method to preserve bandwidth).  It can cut off the start of someone talking though, if I understand correctly.

As for using it with TP server I don't think it's supported.  You might be able to get it to work if you route it via a CUBE or something but that's probably more hassle than it's worth.

Is there any particuar reason? Will saving 64K of bandwidth intermitently on multi-party audio conferences actually help you very much?

[Paulo Souza · Accepted solution]

Hi Gonzalo,

I agree with Nick. Checking all the oficial TP Server documentation, you won't find anything informing that TP Server supports VAD. So I could say surely it does not support.

Well, for me, TP Server does not support VAD because VAD is not helpfull in video calls. In a video call, the heaviest traffic is the video streaming and not the audio streaming, mainly regarding TP Server that supports multiple screens and brings a imersive telepresence experience. So, if you plan to use VAD with TP Server in order to save bandwidth, it does not make much sense in my opinion, once you will still have video traffic crossing the network, furtheremore, again, TP Server is designed to imersive telepresence mainly.

I know you have audio only participants, but I am just trying to show that TP Server is designed to imersive telepresence experience and not to be a common audio bridges for VoIP calls, that's why I think Cisco has not implemented VAD on TP Server. 

In my experience with Cisco Unified Communication, I would say that VAD normally is applicable in small VOIP links, where bandwidth saving can make some difference. But in high definition video calls, I don't think it is helpfull. Furthermore, most users that I have seen do not like VAD.

Can you tell us more about your need? Why do you need to use VAD?

Regards

Paulo Souza

Please rate replies and mark question as "answered" if applicable.