<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Hello,<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 07/06/16 11:30, Mx R wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAN5t_Bk8MKPcHLqqFnnsumOiu46nGuJx4ntBoyZnd+PiWpCdUQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi Daniel,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Advise please, that it is better to use rtpproxy or
mediaproxy?</div>
<div>And what version of rtpproxy better? This one <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://github.com/miconda/rtpproxy"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/miconda/rtpproxy">https://github.com/miconda/rtpproxy</a></a>
or this <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://github.com/sippy/rtpproxy">https://github.com/sippy/rtpproxy</a>?</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
sippy/rtpproxy integrates my patches from miconda/rtpproxy, plus new
features, so it is better to use sippy version.<br>
<br>
And I think you should look at rtpproxy vs rtpengine
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/sipwise/rtpengine">https://github.com/sipwise/rtpengine</a>) these days if you want to
choose between rtp relaying applications for kamailio. The later is
useful if you plan webrtc gatewaying at some point or you have lots
of rtp streams, because it can do kernel based forwarding.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Daniel<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.asipto.com">http://www.asipto.com</a> - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.kamailio.org">http://www.kamailio.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://twitter.com/#!/miconda">http://twitter.com/#!/miconda</a> - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda">http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda</a></pre>
</body>
</html>