On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Russell Bryant
russ...@russellbryant.net wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
Suggestion 1: Make the module opt in instead of opt out.
In most cases, I would normally agree with this proposal, as I
personally prefer
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Russell Bryant russ...@russellbryant.net
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
Personally, I'd like some way to present any user of Asterisk with a
one-time only, non-annoying please help the project and opt in
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Leif Madsen leif.mad...@avoxi.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Russell Bryant russ...@russellbryant.net
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com
wrote:
Personally, I'd like some way to present any user of Asterisk
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
Suggestion 1: Make the module opt in instead of opt out.
In most cases, I would normally agree with this proposal, as I
personally prefer an opt in model instead of an opt out model.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure I can
How often were you envisioning having the job call home? I was
thinking at startup and core reload and if that's the case why bother
with an external process and the work that goes with it? I know
someone mentioned they don't want asterisk crashing because of a flaw
in the beacon but you
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
snip
Thanks everyone for the suggestions and ideas. I'm sorry I haven't had
a chance to reply back to them all until now, but I've had a lot of
trips and other things pop up, and didn't have a chance to fully
digest the
snip
Thanks everyone for the suggestions and ideas. I'm sorry I haven't had
a chance to reply back to them all until now, but I've had a lot of
trips and other things pop up, and didn't have a chance to fully
digest the suggestions and reply back until now.
I've grouped the various suggestions
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Tzafrir Cohen tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:15:40AM -0600, George Joseph wrote:
The only volatile stats to be reported were active/total calls and I'd be
willing to give that up to keep the process simple. Even if we did keep
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 01:24:17PM -0500, Scott Griepentrog wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Tzafrir Cohen tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
wrote:
Quoting the spec:
| Spoofing
|
| In order to limit spoofing, the server will return a token for all
| accepted requests to a server.
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:39:04AM -0600, George Joseph wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:47 AM, George Joseph
george.jos...@fairview5.com wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Tzafrir Cohen tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:39 AM, George Joseph
george.jos...@fairview5.com wrote:
Hmmm. It just seems to me we're way over thinking this. Separate
executables and a public APIs seems overkill for something that on;y needs
to run for a few seconds on startup and reload.
Hmm, yes, I guess
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:15:40AM -0600, George Joseph wrote:
The only volatile stats to be reported were active/total calls and I'd be
willing to give that up to keep the process simple. Even if we did keep
the calls, and it reported a few times a day I still don't see the need for
the
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:47 AM, George Joseph
george.jos...@fairview5.com wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Tzafrir Cohen tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 01:29:04PM -0600, George
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Tzafrir Cohen tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:39:04AM -0600, George Joseph wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:47 AM, George Joseph
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:47 AM, George Joseph
george.jos...@fairview5.com wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Tzafrir Cohen tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 01:29:04PM -0600, George Joseph wrote:
As for the other issues, why not just have asterisk fork itself on
Correction: as one will end up getting a new ID (the second one to reuse
the same token).
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Scott Griepentrog sgriepent...@digium.com
wrote:
So as opposed to spoofing, there is also the case that someone having a
copy of Asteirsk in a virtual machine clones it,
So as opposed to spoofing, there is also the case that someone having a
copy of Asteirsk in a virtual machine clones it, and ends up with two
instances reporting the same random ID. With the spoofing detection
mechanism (using tokens to get an ID from the server), the effect of this
case is
Quoting the spec:
| Spoofing
|
| In order to limit spoofing, the server will return a token for all
| accepted requests to a server. Any subsequent requests to that resource
| must present the token in the request. If a subsequent request fails to
| provide the token, the request is rejected.
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 01:29:04PM -0600, George Joseph wrote:
As for the other issues, why not just have asterisk fork itself on startup
and reloads just to send the stats. No separate executables, no AMI, no
cron, and you get the process separation so a segv or orthe rerror doesn't
kill
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Tzafrir Cohen tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 01:29:04PM -0600, George Joseph wrote:
As for the other issues, why not just have asterisk fork itself on
startup
and reloads just to send the stats. No separate executables, no AMI, no
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:35:11PM -0500, Matthew Jordan wrote:
[1] https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Asterisk+Beacon+Module
One minor issue: the operating system seems to be mostly (at least in
the example given there) identified by the kernel. This doesn't always
map good to the
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:37:37PM -0500, Matthew Jordan wrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Rodrigo Ramírez Norambuena
decipher...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 11:49:39AM -0400, Moises Silva wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Russell Bryant russ...@russellbryant.net
wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com
wrote:
* The module must provide the ability for users to opt out of
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
* The module must provide the ability for users to opt out of
gathering statistics.
I believe that this must be opt *in*, not opt out. Yes, you'll get fewer
servers reporting data but it's the much friendlier thing to
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
* The module must provide the ability for users to opt out of
gathering statistics.
I believe that this must be opt *in*, not opt out. Yes,
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:37 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
1) Not all of the data you may want to retrieve may be readily
available. Granted, right now, I don't think that's the case, but
there's certainly more flexibility if you have access to Asterisk's C
APIs.
If the time
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
Hey everyone -
At the past several AstriDevCon events, we've had an open discussion
about adding a module to Asterisk that would gather anonymous usage
statistics. Said module would be used to help the Asterisk
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 11:49:39AM -0400, Moises Silva wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
Hey everyone -
At the past several AstriDevCon events, we've had an open discussion
about adding a module to Asterisk that would gather anonymous usage
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Rodrigo Ramírez Norambuena
decipher...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 11:49:39AM -0400, Moises Silva wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
Hey everyone -
At the past several AstriDevCon events, we've had
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:40 PM, George Joseph
george.jos...@fairview5.com wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
Hey everyone -
At the past several AstriDevCon events, we've had an open discussion
about adding a module to Asterisk that would gather
Hey everyone -
At the past several AstriDevCon events, we've had an open discussion
about adding a module to Asterisk that would gather anonymous usage
statistics. Said module would be used to help the Asterisk Developer
community better support the users of Asterisk, as we would have some
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Matthew Jordan mjor...@digium.com wrote:
Hey everyone -
At the past several AstriDevCon events, we've had an open discussion
about adding a module to Asterisk that would gather anonymous usage
statistics. Said module would be used to help the Asterisk
32 matches
Mail list logo
