Sunrise Ltd wrote:
Olle E. Johansson wrote:
Well, I have users that get an account on my PBX.
I really don't care how many phones they want to use, hardware phones on their desktop or soft phones on their laptop while travelling. It's still a user with one
account.
Two words: self provisioning.
Right.
Asterisk doesn't really bother with *users*, it has a device-centric view of life, universe and propably
everything.
That's only partly correct. The queue management system has a user view, called agents, and agents can authenticate themselves independently from the device they are using and then attach themselves to call queues managed by Asterisk.
However, for anything unrelated to queue management, you are correct in that Asterisk doesn't apply this concept there.
Agreed. I wasn't clear enough. Asterisk have users in many places, but no centralized view of a "user".
Still I disagree that parallel forking is the way to do this. I even disagree that it would introduce a user view. Instead it would water down the device view. So you go from an system with a very clean device view but without a universally applied user view to a system with a messy device view and still no user view.
I haven't said that parallel forking is my recommended way of doing this. I've stated several times that it doesn't really comply with the architecture of Asterisk, unless done in an Asterisk-architecture friendly way :-) And adding it will not solve the user dilemma, as you say. I hope I did not say it that way. That was why I brought up that we regardless of parallell forking will have to look at the user and authentication architecture of Asterisk.
Not if you give them a means to provision it themselves. This can be as easy as an extension that asks for a PIN number and then executes a shell script.
Right. Please send samples of this so we can add it to the Wiki!
If I had support for multiple registrations on one [peer] account, the [peer] would become a user account instead of a device
Well, that's an opinion.
I'd rather prefer to have a user layer on top and in addition to a device layer instead of trading one for the other.
Right, me too.
This is how GSM works BTW, you have the IMEI which identifies the device and the IMSI which identifies the subscriber. A subscriber may be using the same IMSI on different devices, but the IMEI for each device is unique. The IMEI lives in the device. The IMSI lives on the SIM card.
Thats where we should go. [peer]s and [user]s being devices (IMEI) and a new user architecture representing the IMSI. We have accountcode now. It's not enough.
I guess that's why a lot of people ask for this function.
No, people asking for this because "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."
:-)
/O _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
