But if I segment my zap channels, that shouldn't be an issue, correct? I.e. Instance 1 => Port 1, Instance 2 => Port 2, etc. Of course, you are also assuming there is Zap channels, as I believe he is using a gateway, which takes that out of the equation.
On 9/25/06 2:23 PM, "Eric "ManxPower" Wieling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Best of luck getting multiple instances of Asterisk to play nice when > accessing Zap channels. > > > James Texter wrote: >> Doug, >> I actually see this as a pretty logical way to solve the problem. >> Please keep us posted if you have any luck sorting out running multiple >> instances, or mail me off-list if no one else is interested. >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> On 9/25/06 1:52 PM, "Douglas Garstang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Brian Rogan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 12:40 PM >>>> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion >>>> Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Running Multiple Instances of Asterisk >>>> >>>> >>>> Doug, >>>> >>>> Why do you want to do this to begin with? I think the best >>>> solution is >>> Because we are trying to build a hosted IPT solution, not an enterprise >>> solution. >>> >>>> to use the realtime stuff, and build your own management tools, which >>>> would allow you to do this (you could drastically cut the complexity >>>> with the right tools). Even if you could run them together, how >>>> would you put everything on the appropriate ports? How would you deal >>>> with multiple instances accessing hardware? >>> Realtime is resource intensive, requiring many queries to perform simple >>> lookups. We can easily create multiple virtual IP address, and since each >>> virtual IP address can bind to port 5060, each phone can register with >>> domain.com:5060 without a problem. We don't need multiple instances to >>> access >>> hardware as this is a SIP only solution. Our PSTN access is via external >>> Audiocodes gateways, not via Digium T1 cards. >>> >>> The dial plan was not able to handle the complexity we needed (for example >>> the >>> MySQL() application command could not do nested queries), and so right now, >>> we >>> have a 2000 line python script and several very complex MySQL stored >>> procedures in order to fulfull our requirements. >>> >>>> I'm not convinced that maintaining the config files, binaries >>>> and other >>>> components of multiple asterisk's is easier than just building better >>>> tools to configure one. >>> I am. I look at our configuration which is currently for one customer, and >>> there's already several dozen contexts in order to cover a lot of >>> complexity. >>> Multiply that by a couple of hundred, and I won't want to be administering >>> it! >>> >>>> You could also try User-Mode-Linux or something like that. >>> I was going to give v-servers a try. There's a guide at: >>> http://www.telephreak.org/papers/vpa/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- >>> >>> asterisk-users mailing list >>> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >>> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >> > > _______________________________________________ > --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- James Texter _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
