Call Quality Slidder

This forum includes tips for maintaining the best audio quality possible with the Ooma System. If your Ooma system is having issues with dropped calls, static audio or echo, look here for assistance.
jt25741
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:06 am

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by jt25741 » Sat May 30, 2009 11:57 am

southsound wrote:Interesting. I've restarted mine and it does not show up. My system is running 22924.22924. Maybe they are doing a rolling upgrade. Has anyone else noticed the new QOS settings on their hub?

jt25741 could you check your firmware rev for me?
24912.24912

WayneDsr
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:28 pm
Location: Northern Indiana

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by WayneDsr » Sat May 30, 2009 12:19 pm

I still have 22924.22924.

Wayne

jt25741
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:06 am

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by jt25741 » Sat May 30, 2009 1:21 pm

WayneDsr wrote:I still have 22924.22924.

Wayne
Not sure just how useful this feature is. It seems it is just the bucket for multiple simultaneous calls so Ooma QoS can carve out enough reserved bandwidth. Ie...somebody who has lots of scouts and lines.

Anyone from Ooma/Moderator shed some light to confirm this? I have not done any subjective quality testing. Plus since I have the ooma hub between modem and router, I do not have any way to get data usage or port statistics on actual bandwidth being consumed by a single call. I would like to see this number go up, of course. I'm sure we'll all find out soon enough. My bet is that nothing has changed with the Codecs, but would like to be pleasantly surprised ;)

Thanks

murphy
Posts: 7165
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by murphy » Sat May 30, 2009 2:44 pm

My hub has the update.
24912.24912

My hub has not been rebooted in at least a month, possibly back when the general outage happened.
Customer since January 2009
Telo with 2 Handsets, a Linx, and a Safety Phone
Telo2 with 2 Handsets and a Linx

dueport
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 3:19 pm

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by dueport » Sat May 30, 2009 3:00 pm

I have 22924.22924 as well so I don't see that option either. This sounds like the "call quality slider" Bobby B alluded to. It would really be nice for ooma to update us on this feature. People requested clarification almost two months ago (see early postings in this thread) on whether the "call quality slider" (or another feature) would allow for increased call size and no ooma moderator has bothered to respond to us. As a new ooma customer who is still within my 30 return period I'm about ready to leave - I am astounded at the poor quality of both ooma technical support and ooma call quality.

User avatar
Bobby B
Ooma Moderator
Posts: 1457
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 8:41 pm
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Contact:

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by Bobby B » Mon Jun 01, 2009 2:20 pm

The latest version 24912 is being rolled out over the next few days to all users. This version has the new QoS option to adjust how much bandwidth ooma allocates for the QoS bandwidth.

You're right - this is mostly useful for users that have multiple simultaneous calls going on at the same time (especially when using fax). The old QoS only allocated 100 Kbps (10 Kbps for ooma control traffic and 90 Kbps for voice traffic). This was just enough bandwidth for a single fax call (when dialing *99, ooma will use an uncompressed audio codec that takes up to 90 Kbps). Now you can control how much bandwidth will be reserved for your voice calls.

I'd check out for more details:
http://cp-ooma.talismaonline.com/articl ... 50&p=12040

I'll try to update the articles sometime this week with further explanations.

-Bobby
jt25741 wrote: Not sure just how useful this feature is. It seems it is just the bucket for multiple simultaneous calls so Ooma QoS can carve out enough reserved bandwidth. Ie...somebody who has lots of scouts and lines.
Bobby B

dueport
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 3:19 pm

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by dueport » Mon Jun 01, 2009 2:24 pm

Bobby B - will ooma be adding a feature to increase the size of each call (so we can automatically set every call -incoming and outgoing - to use 90 Kbps without having to use *99 (which only applies to outgoing calls anyway))? If so, when will this feature be released?

User avatar
Bobby B
Ooma Moderator
Posts: 1457
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 8:41 pm
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Contact:

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by Bobby B » Mon Jun 01, 2009 2:58 pm

Hi dueport, there are no short-term plans to do this right now...
dueport wrote:Bobby B - will ooma be adding a feature to increase the size of each call (so we can automatically set every call -incoming and outgoing - to use 90 Kbps without having to use *99 (which only applies to outgoing calls anyway))? If so, when will this feature be released?
Bobby B

dueport
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 3:19 pm

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by dueport » Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:01 pm

That's disappointing...I'm afraid I may to have to cancel my account because the call quality (static when talking) simply isn't bearable for people I'm talking to without *99 (which isn't a work around for incoming calls). I really do appreciate you responding so quickly to my post though. I wish ooma all the best.

User avatar
Bobby B
Ooma Moderator
Posts: 1457
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 8:41 pm
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Contact:

Re: Call Quality Slidder

Post by Bobby B » Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:04 pm

Have you had a chance to work with support on this issue? You shouldn't be experiencing static in the standard voice codec (i.e. without dialing *99). *99 was implemented to support sending of faxes, which requires uncompressed voice transmission.

dueport wrote:That's disappointing...I'm afraid I'm going to have to cancel my account because the call quality (static when talking) simply isn't bearable for people I'm talking to without *99 (which isn't a work around for incoming calls). I really do appreciate you responding so quickly to my post though. I wish ooma all the best.
Bobby B

Post Reply