--- Uriel Carrasquilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John:
are you aware of any documentation on how to configre SER to be a
front-end
to Asterisk?
I suspect it is very inexpensive to put a SER server in a hosting
facility
I think the cost is about the same as for putting a web server
at a
Chris Albertson wrote:
This is the big problem with using Asterisk for SIP. With Asterisk
the audio data between two SIP extensions has to actualy go into
then out of the Asterisk box. This does not scale well to
thousands of users like in a university campus or a comercial
SIP service.
Uriel -
1) Please stop top-posting.
2) I'm afraid I don't have any data on specifics of creating a
front-end. I know how to do it, but my time these days is spent
writing lots of other projects that I have been doing. :-) I would
suggest you get SER and set it up - it's quite easy, and
Andre:
This makes a lot of sense. I had used Asterisk in the past to play the role
of Gatekeeper for directing traffic to the appropriate Asterisk acting as a
PSTN gateway. IAX does a heck of a good job in that configuration.
However, with SIP, I have run into nothing but trouble with
On 15/10/03 00:15, Uriel Carrasquilla wrote:
Does anybody else have a strong opinion one way or the other? If it
is left to John and myself we have a 1:1 vote.
See how much easier it is to follow the thread of conversation if you
quote just enough of the e-mail you're responding to so people
OK OK OK, I got it. See my response inside the body of your E-mail.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alastair Maw
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 8:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] NAT, SIP (was: No sound with SIP
I'm curently looking into using SER to front end SIP calls for
Asterisk.
Basicaly all SIP users would register with SER not Asterisk and then
Asterisk and SER exchange registrations.
SER is a very capable SIP router, much more sophisticated than Asterisk
as it can look inside packets and route
I'm curently looking into using SER to front end SIP calls for
Asterisk.
Basicaly all SIP users would register with SER not Asterisk and then
Asterisk and SER exchange registrations.
SER is a very capable SIP router, much more sophisticated than Asterisk
as it can look inside packets and route
On 13-10 17:11, John Todd wrote:
[...]
SER is an excellent option as a front end to Asterisk. It is a
true SIP proxy, whereas Asterisk is a hybrid, and SIP has not been
the primary focus of Asterisk development. In fact, Asterisk's SIP
implementation is very limited (though it is
Chris:
I am glad to see someone else asking the same question I have been asking
myself.
As soon as I get my public IP address, I will install SER on the public side
and Asterisk behind a NAT (with dynamic IP) to see if I can get around
problems I have when my SIP (UA) behind their own NAT on the
John:
are you aware of any documentation on how to configre SER to be a front-end
to Asterisk?
I suspect it is very inexpensive to put a SER server in a hosting facility
to forward traffic to multiple Asterisks based on Least Cost Routing.
My problem is that my experience is with Asterisk and not
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Todd
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 8:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] NAT, SIP (was: No sound with SIP Phones on
the Internet)
I'm curently looking into using SER to front end SIP
On Monday 13 October 2003 22:26, Uriel Carrasquilla wrote:
John:
are you aware of any documentation on how to configre SER to be a front-end
to Asterisk?
Hi Uriel,
At TeleSIP we run a cluster of several geographically distributed SER Servers
that hande all our SIP Routing. SER is a robust,
13 matches
Mail list logo
