Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Brent Franks wrote: Aside from echo issues that seem to be apparent with everyone occasionally (by everyone, those not running hardware T1 echo cans) I believe * is ready for the prime time. Integrators however should have a better I add to the list: hangup detection on FXO interfaces is terrible. The busy tone detection routines does not work right/reliably, at least not for those outside USA. Same thing about callprogress, the lack of support for DTMF CallerID and no R2 signaling. Without these features * will never be a serious option outside US. Gelson ___ 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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
I hope we can get ISDN in Sao Paulo - we have been told it is available as we are planning to deploy an Asterisk box in Brazil. Having said this, Asterisk is what users make it. If you want R2 signalling (and I think a lot of people in South America do!) then please get on and write the module or put a bounty on it so that some enterprising software developer can do it for you. In the rest of the world ISDN BRI and PRI are THE standard telecomms building blocks for all but the smallest of telephone installations, and Asterisk support for this is improving on a regular basis because that is what most people outside the US are using. It is really only the US that seems not to understand ISDN (especially BRI) and there are some quirks relating to ISDN that I am sure will be ironed out sooner rather than later. As regards DTMF caller ID, I think the beginnings of this option are already there as I seem to recall that the CVS head now has experimental support for UK caller ID which requires line monitoring during ringing. Adding DTMF is not difficult. Rather than point out the areas where Asterisk is weak, fix it and make it do what you want, and add it in for the benefit of everyone!. That is what open source is all about. Rgds Tim Gelson Dias Santos wrote: Brent Franks wrote: Aside from echo issues that seem to be apparent with everyone occasionally (by everyone, those not running hardware T1 echo cans) I believe * is ready for the prime time. Integrators however should have a better I add to the list: hangup detection on FXO interfaces is terrible. The busy tone detection routines does not work right/reliably, at least not for those outside USA. Same thing about callprogress, the lack of support for DTMF CallerID and no R2 signaling. Without these features * will never be a serious option outside US. Gelson ___ 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 ___ 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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Maybe, maybe not... Depending how one designs the GUI! No, I think that GUIs though needed, do limit flexibility because the information density is limited on the user-system direction (they are better on the System-user end, however). However, this is NOT an argument not to package them with the project. When I was a newbie at Samba, I used to use SWAT (Samba Web Admin Tool) all the time. However, eventially I discovered that it became easier for me to just modify the config files. This process would not have occurred as easily if I had to learn the config files at first. Guis are great at allowing less knowledgable people to administrate the server with relative competency. They are not so good at allowing one to really engineer the right solution for a customer. So I think both interface types are needed. Another example is X11 on Linux with lots of admin tools. Great for newbies, just not the best for experts. Yes, you are right!! However, GUI for newbie's will help some people to overcome the first hurdles, and then plunge into more advanced stuff! ___ 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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Yes, you are right!! However, GUI for newbie's will help some people to overcome the first hurdles, and then plunge into more advanced stuff! One thing quote a lot of companies do is outsource the initial configuration, because they simply don't have the technical skills initially. But what you want then is a way to easily go in and add an extension, remove someone who's left, setup hunt groups, etc, etc. It's more the general day to day maintenance that needs to be addressed, editing really complex IVR's, dialplans, etc I think should be left to the people who know what there doing. (Although there's nothing stopping adding an advanced interface too..) Just my thoughts =) Kind Regards, Chris Bond ___ 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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Chris Bond wrote: Yes, you are right!! However, GUI for newbie's will help some people to overcome the first hurdles, and then plunge into more advanced stuff! One thing quote a lot of companies do is outsource the initial configuration, because they simply don't have the technical skills initially. But what you want then is a way to easily go in and add an extension, remove someone who's left, setup hunt groups, etc, etc. It's more the general day to day maintenance that needs to be addressed, editing really complex IVR's, dialplans, etc I think should be left to the people who know what there doing. (Although there's nothing stopping adding an advanced interface too..) It could not be said better ! :) ___ 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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 07:06:22PM -0700, George Pajari wrote: http://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/2004/0607faceoffyes.html There are very valid arguments in the contra argument. If you have existing equipment it's all about integration. Traditional telcos are moving to VoIP as are enterprise players and SMBs (small to medium businesses) etc. It may be OK for a small business to replace what they've got, get a techie in to maintain it etc, but that doesn't work at the large side of things. There's also provisioning and other such matters to worry about. If you're a small player again that can be a manual process, or even maybe web based. If you're a larger player, you'll have existing systems in place and provisioning processes in place and any new devices have to fit into these processes. For * to really take off, it does need management interfaces etc. Steve (IMHO of course) -- NetTek Ltd Phone/Fax +44-(0)20 7483 2455 SMS steve-epage (at) gbnet.net [body] gpg 1024D/468952DB 2001-09-19 ___ 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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Steve Kennedy wrote: On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 07:06:22PM -0700, George Pajari wrote: http://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/2004/0607faceoffyes.html There are very valid arguments in the contra argument. If you have existing equipment it's all about integration. Traditional telcos are moving to VoIP as are enterprise players and SMBs (small to medium businesses) etc. It may be OK for a small business to replace what they've got, get a techie in to maintain it etc, but that doesn't work at the large side of things. There's also provisioning and other such matters to worry about. If you're a small player again that can be a manual process, or even maybe web based. If you're a larger player, you'll have existing systems in place and provisioning processes in place and any new devices have to fit into these processes. For * to really take off, it does need management interfaces etc. This is the traditional view of telecoms in large organisations. However it seems in a lot of large companies they are dumping their existing telecoms wholesale for an IP solution, on a site by site basis, as soon as the maintainence contract renewal comes around. It surprises me to see that, and maybe I have seen a very unrepresentative sample, but in some places it does appear to be happening. Of course, right now things like * do not have an adequate reputation to pick up much of that business. There is, however, a preparedness there for radical change. Regards, Steve ___ 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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
This is the traditional view of telecoms in large organisations. However it seems in a lot of large companies they are dumping their existing telecoms wholesale for an IP solution, on a site by site basis, as soon as the maintainence contract renewal comes around. It surprises me to see that, and maybe I have seen a very unrepresentative sample, but in some places it does appear to be happening. Of course, right now things like * do not have an adequate reputation to pick up much of that business. There is, however, a preparedness there for radical change. I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to manage and add users and do anything you can do via a shell interface. If it had that but on a simplified level (oblessly you can have an advanced mode too). It could also integrate with the CDR, meetup, sms, voicemail functions that exist in *. So rather than have different projects for over view of who's on the phone and to who, etc you have one management interface. Just my opinion, at the moment I don't know enough about * to start writing an interface like this. But im sure some of the guys on the list do =) Kind Regards, Chris Bond ___ 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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Chris Bond wrote: I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to manage and add users and do anything you can do via a shell interface. If it had that but on a simplified level (oblessly you can have an advanced mode too). The power of asterisk comes from its method of config. If one wraps it with a GUI one will inherently limit the flexibility. Then since the GUI is what gets 'seen' people ~may~ take the lack of flexibility or even just the look and flow of the GUI to be a reflection on the power of Asterisk. Jeremy McNamara ___ 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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
The power of asterisk comes from its method of config. If one wraps it with a GUI one will inherently limit the flexibility. Then since the GUI is what gets 'seen' people ~may~ take the lack of flexibility or even just the look and flow of the GUI to be a reflection on the power of Asterisk. But if it was an official addon from the cvs tree (similar to the voicemail cgi stuff), it would make take-up a lot easier =) That way you wouldn't make people stuck to one GUI, if they don't want it they don't need to check it out. Its just at the moment, you've got sub projects for lots of different GUIs, what needs to happen is someone to consolidate what's out there and bring it all into one official project. It makes sense that the GUI becomes a web one, then it can run on a number of web browser platforms. Kind Regards, Chris Bond ___ 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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to manage and add users and do anything you can do via a shell interface. If it had that but on a simplified level (oblessly you can have an advanced mode too). There are many of them, and most of them aren't finished. The problem is that if you manage something on a higher level, then usually you loose options. But when you manage things on the low-level, then you don't need a GUI in the first place. That said: I think that there is a need for a simple, well-defined setup method where you sacrifice completeness for ease-of-use. So I searched for something and after I didn't found anything that did suit my needs, I started DESTAR. DE is from Germany's country code. DESTAR will have some features helpful for german users (but non-german user won't be forced to use them, e.g. they will be configurable). The STAR in DESTAR is from Asterisk, which is basically a funny looking star symbol. Why --- Why do I do just another GUI? * Because I can * Because nothing similar exists Why not --- And why I didn't jump on some existing project: * I don't know PHP, I know Perl and (preferred) Python * I don't want to have a GUI that runs on Linux itself, e.g. in Qt or GTK and therefore needs file access to /etc/asterisk * I don't want something that is just an text editor via web, e.g. where I can select a config file and inside the config file the section. What I have --- What I have so far are is a system where I instantiate various classes and set data fields in them. E.g. something very simple like this: EnumEntry( search = e164.arpa ) Or something like that: SipPhone( name = hschurig, ext = 15, host = 192.168.233.67, callerid = Holger Schurig, ) Those objects store themselves into a list. They have methods to check if their variables are all set and can create snippets for the various Asterisk configuration files. For the EnumEntry, it's quite simple: def _write_config(self): c = AstConf(enum.conf) c.append(search=%s, self.search) I get a handle to an object that holds the current enum.conf file. And I call appendValue, which appends a line to the file. For other classes, it can be more complex. The FreeworldDialupIAXLine class writes to extensions.conf and iax.conf. I already use my framework to generate my Asterisk conf files. The generated files are working, but are crap and insecure: everything happens in the default-context. Good enought to test the hardware, but nothing for Aunt Mary. What I want --- Those classes have static variables (which one can access even without instantiating objects out of the classes) that give meta-info about the objects. One can use this to write a frontend. I plan to write a Quixote-based HTML frontend. I already can generate simple forms. Maybe the Actos project uses this backend and writes a GTK based X-Windows-Frontend. Where - Some of this code is available at http://www.holgerschurig.de/files/destar/ ___ 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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
I like the way the 3com NBX system works. The web interface is pretty intuitive. Adding users and devices is a snap through the GUI but to get to the real meat you have to edit the dial plan. To do this, you download a text file to your desktop, edit it, then upload it again. - Original Message - From: Jeremy McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony Chris Bond wrote: I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to manage and add users and do anything you can do via a shell interface. If it had that but on a simplified level (oblessly you can have an advanced mode too). The power of asterisk comes from its method of config. If one wraps it with a GUI one will inherently limit the flexibility. Then since the GUI is what gets 'seen' people ~may~ take the lack of flexibility or even just the look and flow of the GUI to be a reflection on the power of Asterisk. Jeremy McNamara ___ 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 ___ 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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Ditto on Avaya... My $75,000 Avaya Definity G3Si has a GUI that simply wrapps the CLI. If you don't understand the CLI you can't use the GUI. Their Java apps for their interaction center / ip office suck, I prefer the .conf solution. Easier version control and more concrete. TL -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Colin Anderson Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:51 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony I like the way the 3com NBX system works. The web interface is pretty intuitive. Adding users and devices is a snap through the GUI but to get to the real meat you have to edit the dial plan. To do this, you download a text file to your desktop, edit it, then upload it again. Ditto on the Mitel ICP 3300. It's just a GUI layer on top of their command line crap that they dusted off from the SX-2000. Mitel had a great opportunity to redefine PBX managment and they kind of p*ssed it away because their managment stuff was designed by engineers, not GUI designers. At this stage, from what I can see, there's no functional difference between configuring * vs my 3300. So, take heart, * users, Mr. Spenser's little project is, IMHO, equivalent to what an army of Mitel engineers took years to do. ___ 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 ___ 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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
A GUI for asterisk is really not that hard to make if what you do is model the config files in the db. Once it's in the DB all you have to do is the right queries to rebuild the files when changes are made. Then the gui can be totaly adaptable for any use. I think it is posible to give a good interface or better a sort of API. I know that bad things happen when you dedicate yourself to the GUI (ask Micro$ucks), but you can do good things with a GUI. I personaly volunteer to helping on the project. -- Pablo Endres [EMAIL PROTECTED] ComVoz Communications USA: +1 954 343-2085 Ext 199 Venezuela: +58 212 7713195 Ext 199 Colombia: +57 1 3256840 Ext 199 ___ 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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Of course, right now things like * do not have an adequate reputation to pick up much of that business. There is, however, a preparedness there for radical change. When you are able to purchase support contracts on Asterisk (E.g. Yearly (not hourly)) * will gain a lot of momentum. There also needs to be a released version and a lot of marketing work that goes into * before it will be considered mainstream. As techies and early adopters, we realize the full potential, but often the decision makers do/will not without paperwork and case studies. I also think some sort of Digium VAR certification system will ensure that the people that others hire in this process are fully accredited and understand the technology. Aside from echo issues that seem to be apparent with everyone occasionally (by everyone, those not running hardware T1 echo cans) I believe * is ready for the prime time. Integrators however should have a better starting point regarding what type of channel banks are recommended, what is fully supported, which sip phones play nicely etc. Right now it always seems to be a big finger pointing game, (which is fine, and I do fully appreciate Digium's contributions) but in order for it to go mainstream or production on a large scale, many of these issues will need to be addressed. I also don't want this thread of mine to be interpreted as a flame. I am very happy with the way things are right now, but am just stating my observations of how Asterisk is different from say RedHat. It has taken RedHat quite some time to get to where they are today, and I am sure Digium/Asterisk will follow a similar course. - Brent ___ 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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Jeremy McNamara wrote: Chris Bond wrote: I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to manage and add users and do anything you can do via a shell interface. If it had that but on a simplified level (oblessly you can have an advanced mode too). The power of asterisk comes from its method of config. If one wraps it with a GUI one will inherently limit the flexibility. Then since the GUI is what gets 'seen' people ~may~ take the lack of flexibility or even just the look and flow of the GUI to be a reflection on the power of Asterisk. Maybe, maybe not... Depending how one designs the GUI! ___ 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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Need a good document for the Manager API before a GUI can be written!!!;) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pablo Endres Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony A GUI for asterisk is really not that hard to make if what you do is model the config files in the db. Once it's in the DB all you have to do is the right queries to rebuild the files when changes are made. Then the gui can be totaly adaptable for any use. I think it is posible to give a good interface or better a sort of API. I know that bad things happen when you dedicate yourself to the GUI (ask Micro$ucks), but you can do good things with a GUI. I personaly volunteer to helping on the project. -- Pablo Endres [EMAIL PROTECTED] ComVoz Communications USA: +1 954 343-2085 Ext 199 Venezuela: +58 212 7713195 Ext 199 Colombia: +57 1 3256840 Ext 199 ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Senad Jordanovic wrote: Jeremy McNamara wrote: Chris Bond wrote: I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to manage and add users and do anything you can do via a shell interface. If it had that but on a simplified level (oblessly you can have an advanced mode too). The power of asterisk comes from its method of config. If one wraps it with a GUI one will inherently limit the flexibility. Then since the GUI is what gets 'seen' people ~may~ take the lack of flexibility or even just the look and flow of the GUI to be a reflection on the power of Asterisk. Maybe, maybe not... Depending how one designs the GUI! No, I think that GUIs though needed, do limit flexibility because the information density is limited on the user-system direction (they are better on the System-user end, however). However, this is NOT an argument not to package them with the project. When I was a newbie at Samba, I used to use SWAT (Samba Web Admin Tool) all the time. However, eventially I discovered that it became easier for me to just modify the config files. This process would not have occurred as easily if I had to learn the config files at first. Guis are great at allowing less knowledgable people to administrate the server with relative competency. They are not so good at allowing one to really engineer the right solution for a customer. So I think both interface types are needed. Another example is X11 on Linux with lots of admin tools. Great for newbies, just not the best for experts. Best Wishes, Chris Travers Metatron Technology Consulting Your Partner in Technology begin:vcard fn:Chris Travers n:Travers;Chris email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] x-mozilla-html:FALSE version:2.1 end:vcard
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
At 7:06 PM -0700 on 6/8/04, George Pajari wrote: An interesting article for those needing ammunition to sell Asterisk within their organisation or to others: Is open source IP telephony ready for prime time? Yes by Zenas Hutcheson, St. Paul Venture Capital Network World, 06/07/04 http://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/2004/0607faceoffyes.html On a related note, they also have an article arguing the contrary position (see link within article). I'm too busy right now to write up a response showing the flaws in that column but others on the list might wish to contribute to the fray. George Pajari www.netvoice.ca www.IP-Centrex.ca The opposing view had some good points, though I don't agree with many of his comments. http://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/2004/0607faceoffno.html I'm not even going to try to post a reply on NetworkWorld's broken, ad-strewn, and ambiguous forum manager. I think I can disagree with all of Zeus' comments except this: management(*) for IP telephony is just as important as the telephony itself. Without the ability to measure, manage, and examine performance, it is a tough sell for open-source software in the enterprise. Perhaps that doesn't matter, actually. Enterprise isn't really where Asterisk is written and supported, so we don't see the robust features that an enterprise would require. Remember: there are no sales brochures for Asterisk, and the CTO who is looking to implement Solution C or Asterisk will not have anything to use in the Asterisk column except for (maybe) my feature spreadsheet and an enthusiastic network admin who runs it at home. This will not typically lead to Asterisk as the winner. I am not saying that this is good or bad, actually. It's neutral. The purpose of Open Source is not to defeat commercial implementations of the same features, but to provide a better solution for some people who want to get in there and make things work exactly they way they wanted, if they have the spare time, clue, and don't have any money to pay someone else to do it. JT (*): for a quick definition of what management means, here are some concepts: provisioning interfaces, per-stream QoS examination, overall QoS examination, call routing interfaces (GUI or otherwise), cost control and cost examination tools, etc. You're saying Well, all of that can be easily built! Sure it can, but careful with that word easily. The question is: are these components a patchwork of third-party tools, or is it a well-planned whole-system design? Is management an afterthought? As an example of what enterprise users might need, view this post and note that there have been no movements towards answering these items: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/2003-July/014965.html Again, this is not a fault that these management reports don't exist. If nobody develops these reports, then maybe they're not used by the people that use Asterisk. Enterprise users aren't so hot on developing things themselves, so maybe this just languishes, and so they don't use Asterisk (yet?) because the combined effort of doing all that stuff is just more than it's worth when they can have the CFO sign a check for Vendor A to get it all done. ___ 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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
John Todd wrote: I am not saying that this is good or bad, actually. It's neutral. The purpose of Open Source is not to defeat commercial implementations of the same features, but to provide a better solution for some people who want to get in there and make things work exactly they way they wanted, if they have the spare time, clue, and don't have any money to pay someone else to do it. Or, maybe even they _do_ have the money to pay someone else to do it, but they are open-minded enough to let those hired brains help them make the right decisions :-) ___ 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
