Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [opensips] [RFC] An initial attempt of porting rtpproxy-ng module from your twin project to OpenSIPS. (#152)
Just to clear things up, I had no part in porting this module to opensips other than the original implementation from which it is derived. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/pull/152#issuecomment-46328088___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [opensips] [RFC] An initial attempt of porting rtpproxy-ng module from your twin project to OpenSIPS. (#152)
Correct, the protocol is different and incompatible, but heavily based on the original rtpproxy protocol in terms of functionality. The protocol offers all the same flags that the original rtpproxy protocol supported, just transported in a different way to allow it to be extended freely. Also, at least in the original rtpproxy-ng module, the function interface is completely identical to the rtpproxy module. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/pull/152#issuecomment-35803475___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [opensips] [RFC] An initial attempt of porting rtpproxy-ng module from your twin project to OpenSIPS. (#152)
As the author of mediaproxy-ng, let me try to clear up the confusion about the naming. Many moons ago, the team at Sipwise was using a privately developed, closed source RTP proxy. It was designed to be used with the Openser mediaproxy module, and as such we called our project mediaproxy, even though it was completely unrelated to the AG Projects Mediaproxy. Later on, we decided to redesign our mediaproxy from scratch and eventually make it open source. Thus, mediaproxy-ng was born. At around the same time, we decided to shift our focus away from the Openser mediaproxy module and support the control module rtpproxy instead (even though compatibility with the other module was retained). Yet again later on, consensus among developers was that the future way to go for media/RTP proxying was to employ a JSON-like control protocol that allows complete rewriting of the entire SDP body. We went ahead and implemented this into mediaproxy-ng. As a new control module was required, we took the old rtpproxy module and modified it. As the new module was (and still is) intended as a drop-in replacement for the rtpproxy module (and not the unrelated mediaproxy module), we called it rtpproxy-ng to make transitioning easier. Other people have suggested to call the new module mediaproxy-ng instead of rtpproxy-ng, which would be more logical because it was meant to be used with the mediaproxy-ng daemon, but then that would imply that this module somehow is a fork or modification of the old mediaproxy module, which it isn't. All the functions within rtpproxy-ng are taken more or less directly from rtpproxy without even renaming them, so it makes sense to retain rtpproxy in the name of the module. Also, there's no reason why rtpproxy-ng cannot be used with other RTP/media proxies if they choose to implement this new protocol. By no means is it exclusive to mediaproxy-ng. So the reasons for the naming are entirely historical. Other than the reasons given for easy transitioning from rtpproxy to rtpproxy-ng, there's no reason why the module can't be renamed to anything else. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/pull/152#issuecomment-35743563___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [opensips] [RFC] An initial attempt of porting rtpproxy-ng module from your twin project to OpenSIPS. (#152)
Actually it's not all that easy. Plus, I find it silly to argue about a mere name like that. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/pull/152#issuecomment-35787429___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [opensips] [RFC] An initial attempt of porting rtpproxy-ng module from your twin project to OpenSIPS. (#152)
It wasn't me who asked for this module to be included in your project. I only provided an explanation of why things were named the way they are. The original rtpproxy-ng module is called rtpproxy-ng because it's based on the module named rtpproxy. For now, it happens to work only with a software called mediaproxy-ng. If you feel that this (subjectively) confusing naming is reason enough for this new protocol not to be supported by your software, then that's fine (even though you're free to give the module any name you wish). I'm not going to argue with you about that. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/pull/152#issuecomment-35792240___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
