>From: [email protected] >[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George Joseph >Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 1:16 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: [asterisk-dev] Opinions needed: Should PJSIP support enhancements >still be allowed in 12->13? > >Even though I've been using pjsip on my dev and test machines for a year, it's >only in the last few weeks I've tried to implement pjsip in a prod environment >and that's brought up some >issues. Unfortunately now that we're close to a >13 release there's some trepidation about addressing these issues in 12->13 as >opposed to just trunk... > >res_phoneprov: Today's phoneprov infrastructure is strictly chan_sip using >users.conf and sip.conf for all user related configuration. There's no pjsip >support there at all. I have 2 patches posted >to RB ([1], [2]) that make >res_phoneprov pluggable and provide a pjsip provider for phoneprov. All >existing functionality remains unchanged. You just get the same capabilities >for pjsip that >you had for sip. > >manager/config: From a remote configuration management perspective The AMI >commands GetConfig, GetConfigJSON and UpdateConfig allow you to manipulate >Asterisk config files, BUT >they don't work well on configurations that can >have multiple sections with the same name. This was rarely a problem before >pjsip but now you can have an endpoint, an aor, an auth, an identify >and an >registration all named 'myitsp'. This makes it impossible to manipulate them > via AMI. I have a patch to enhance manager.config with that capability as >well as the cabability to >manipulate config templates via AMI. [3] > >Finally, While thinking of alternatives for the config file dilemma, Josh, >Brad and I tossed around the idea of a 'super' pjsip object or objects that >could represent a 'trunk' or a 'user' thereby >eliminating having to specify >separate endpoint, aor, auth, identify and registration objects for common >scenarios. [4] I just started writing code for this today. > >So now the big question is... Can these items go into 12/13 or should they >go only in ttrunk/14. I do need these patches but I can always apply them to >my own distro. My opinion though is >that they should go into 12/13 to help >speed the adoption of pjsip. No one who uses phoneprov or AMI to manipulate >config files will able migrate otherwise. Having said that, I realize that 13 >>GA is almost upon us and having defined cutoffs is a very good thing. > >Thought's? Opinions?
If PJSIP in Asterisk 13 is *supposed* to have feature parity with chan_sip, then I’d call the above items bugs rather than enhancements. I strongly support the policy of “no new features” after a branch has been released, but sometimes the changes are so important they should be made anyway. AELSub is a great example of the latter.
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
