Re: IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-04 Thread Steven J. Sobol
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Steven Critchfield wrote: So you bought that line of Marketecture didn't you. I think there are several large open source projects that prove that C is maintainable. Maintainability is really a function of organization. If you can't be organized, you will not produce very

IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-03 Thread Alastair Maw
On 03/11/03 00:25, Mark Spencer wrote: As a side note, I strongly would like to see someone implement a client using libiax2 which implements IAX2 instead of the (now obsolescent) IAX version 1. I'm implementing a Java-based IVR server (and yes, I know Asterisk does IVR, and no, it's not flexible

Re: IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-03 Thread Jeremy McNamara
Alastair Maw wrote: On 03/11/03 00:25, Mark Spencer wrote: As a side note, I strongly would like to see someone implement a client using libiax2 which implements IAX2 instead of the (now obsolescent) IAX version 1. I'm implementing a Java-based IVR server (and yes, I know Asterisk does IVR,

Re: IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-03 Thread Alastair Maw
On 03/11/03 16:35, Jeremy McNamara wrote: I'm implementing a Java-based IVR server (and yes, I know Asterisk does IVR, and no, it's not flexible enough to do what I want and no, it doesn't integrate well with the Java systems we have, etc. hence my doing this). Are you mad? What is not flexable

Re: IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-03 Thread Alastair Maw
On 03/11/03 18:02, Alastair Maw wrote: I'm implementing a Java-based IVR server (and yes, I know Asterisk does IVR, and no, it's not flexible enough to do what I want and no, it doesn't integrate well with the Java systems we have, etc. hence my doing this). Are you mad? What is not flexable

Re: IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-03 Thread Steven Critchfield
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 12:02, Alastair Maw wrote: On 03/11/03 16:35, Jeremy McNamara wrote: I'm implementing a Java-based IVR server (and yes, I know Asterisk does IVR, and no, it's not flexible enough to do what I want and no, it doesn't integrate well with the Java systems we have, etc.

Re: IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-03 Thread Steven Critchfield
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 13:49, Alastair Maw wrote: On 03/11/03 18:02, Alastair Maw wrote: I'm implementing a Java-based IVR server (and yes, I know Asterisk does IVR, and no, it's not flexible enough to do what I want and no, it doesn't integrate well with the Java systems we have, etc. hence

Re: IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-03 Thread Mark Spencer
- Should I implement IAX or IAX2? What's the main difference, other than IAX2 supporting trunking (which according to the docs needs a Zaptel timing source). IAX2 without any question. You will not be required to run trunk mode in your case, especially if you're just doing it

Re: IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-03 Thread Alastair Maw
On 03/11/03 20:03, Steven Critchfield wrote: Sounds like you really need a C programmer and get into the guts of asterisk. Can't get more flexible than having the source code yourself to do anything you want. You could add your DSP routines into the dsp.c file and call them when needed. You can

Re: IAX2 Java library (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] New IAX software phone (for WIndows platform))

2003-11-03 Thread Steven Critchfield
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 16:27, Alastair Maw wrote: On 03/11/03 20:03, Steven Critchfield wrote: Sounds like you really need a C programmer and get into the guts of asterisk. Can't get more flexible than having the source code yourself to do anything you want. You could add your DSP routines