On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Russell Bryant <[email protected]> wrote: > On 07/01/2013 12:29 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Russell Bryant <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 06/30/2013 01:03 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: >>>> Personally, I would stay with Asterisk 1.8, but that is just my >>>> opinion. WebRTC support in Asterisk is still maturing and I wouldn't >>>> count on using it for production for a little longer. >>> >>> It's definitely bleeding edge. I think the standards are still in flux, >>> as well. >>> >>> Since the primary use case here is conferencing, perhaps a more >>> compelling reason to use something newer than Asterisk 1.8 is the newer, >>> and much better conferencing application, ConfBridge, starting in >>> Asterisk 10. It doesn't require special kernel support like the older >>> conferencing app, MeetMe. It's more efficient, more configurable, and >>> has some basic video support. >>> >> I agree, I think the specific conference functionality need is going >> to drive which version of Asterisk we use. Unfortantly, Asterisk 10 >> is already in security fixes only, and EOL shortly [2]. So we should >> consider 1.8 or 11. >> >>>> As for the Asterisk package, don't expect to see anything greater then >>>> 1.8 from Debian / Ubuntu until some newly embedded libraries are >>>> removed. I am not sure about REL, I'm sure Russell knows. Other >>>> option are compiling from source or rolling our own packages, but not >>>> sure we'd want to take on that responsibility. >>> >>> You can get up to date packages for CentOS 6 from Digium. >>> >>> http://packages.asterisk.org/centos/centos-asterisk-11.repo >>> >>> I think that's what I would go with. When Paul and I worked there, the >>> same thing was available for Ubuntu, but it has since died off. >>> >> I personally prefer Debian / Ubuntu, but ultimately falls to the >> -infra team (assuming they are managing) which OS to use. As for which >> packaging repo to use, I'd vote a distro over packages.asterisk.org, >> they tend to get more packaging love :) > > I'm not sure what you mean by "love", but the version quoted as being in > precise, 1.8.10.1, was released in March of 2012. The 1.8.x series is > up to 1.8.22 at this point. > > I personally really don't care about the distro. I just want a modern > version of Asterisk while minimizing work needed to get it. > > I hope that Ubuntu package includes security patches. The following > security bugs are present in 1.8.10.1: > > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-004.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-005.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-006.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-007.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-008.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-010.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-011.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-012.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-013.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-014.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-015.html > http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2013-003.html > Let me retract my comments about 'love', as they don't add to the conversation. Asterisk from Ubuntu is not actively maintained, Debian is another story, the pkg-voip team does a very good job dealing with security fixes. However, Asterisk 11 is not in the repo yet do to embedded libraries.
>>>> Here's the puppet modules I use for my asterisk deployments[1]. They >>>> worked great for my needs, however some work on my side would be >>>> needed to split them out. I've been meaning to get around to doing >>>> it, but sadly other things come up. >>>> >>>> Managing Asterisk with Puppet works pretty well actually, I don't >>>> think I have had any issue between both of them. The real decision >>>> point comes down to how you plan to configure asterisk, eg realtime vs >>>> static files. I prefer static files, which makes puppet happier. >>> >>> How tied to Ubuntu and Asterisk 1.8 are your modules? >>> >> They are the only things supported right now. Additionally, the >> manifests require specific functionally merged into Asterisk. I >> believe Asterisk 11 has everything needed, but would have to double >> check. My manifests rely heavy on specific configuration file >> functionality in Asterisk (EG: #include, #tryinclude statement). Like >> I said, the setup works great but we'd need to do some work on them to >> confirm Asterisk 11 would work. >> >> If we do decided to use the manifests, I don't have an issue stepping >> up and doing the leg work on them. I need to do it eventually, and >> helping OpenStack would be a good cause. >> >> [2] https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Asterisk+Versions > > > -- > Russell Bryant -- Paul Belanger | PolyBeacon, Inc. Jabber: [email protected] | IRC: pabelanger (Freenode) Github: https://github.com/pabelanger | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pabelanger _______________________________________________ OpenStack-Infra mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
