Hi all,
Here I a have a question and hope that someone give me the right answer...Is
it better to use Intel CPU inside the hardware where I need to install
Asterisk or AMD? It's better to use 32 bits or 64 bit and what is the
difference between both of them?
Thanks a lot
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at
On Sun, 22 Feb 2009, michel freiha wrote:
Here I a have a question and hope that someone give me the right
answer...Is it better to use Intel CPU inside the hardware where I need
to install Asterisk or AMD? It's better to use 32 bits or 64 bit and
what is the difference between both of
I think in this case when 5k call are involved i think all the difficulty of
the project is to split the load on different parts of the system. In my
case i would do it like that:
Phones ---Opensips (Double server with heartbeat and in different places)
|
Dear Alex,
Thanks for the reply..Can you please list some of these solutions that you
talked about on your reply?
Even I would like to ask if you had a bad experience with asterisk regarding
simultaneous calls limitation and If I'll send 1k calls to an asterisk
machine with the appropriate
Dear Helm,
Kindly confirm why you do not recommend the VMs solution and if you had bad
experience for it and what did you get?
Regards
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 9:24 PM, Wilton Helm wh...@compuserve.com wrote:
You may be able to split up some of the servers into multiple VMs -- maybe
five
Wilton Helm wh...@compuserve.com writes:
I'm not sure I see the merit in this. VMs seem to be regarded as a magic
bullet (i.e. free lunch). I don't know of any case where 5 VMs can
accomplish more work on one processor than simply letting the processor
manage it all
Modern machines have
Check out FreeSwitch to replace Asterisk in your core.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:42 AM, michel freiha mich...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Alex,
Thanks for the reply..Can you please list some of these solutions that you
talked about on your reply?
Even I would like to ask if you had a bad
On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 12:24 -0700, Wilton Helm wrote:
I'm not sure I see the merit in this. VMs seem to be regarded as a
magic bullet (i.e. free lunch). I don't know of any case where 5 VMs
can accomplish more work on one processor than simply letting the
processor manage it all (except if
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, michel freiha wrote:
Hi all,
I'm planning to build a VOIP solution for handling SIP calls coming from
endpoints registered on a specific SIP proxy...I made some research
regarding network architecture and found out that the best solution is to
use OpenSips as SIP
No, asterisk on conventional hardware can handle at most a few hundred
calls.
I would strongly discourage the use of Asterisk purely as a transit
element for billing. Just because a2billing is available does not mean
you should. Far more scalable solutions are easily available.
--
Sent
Just a laypersons opinion - I'm sure others here have better answers or
justifications.
1. no (at least not realistically, mathematically there are some)
2. perhaps - bandwidth would be your primary concern since 5K calls
would take 150 M of bandwidth
3. IMO it would be better to
2009/2/17 Danny Nicholas da...@debsinc.com
Just a laypersons opinion – I'm sure others here have better answers or
justifications.
1. no (at least not realistically, mathematically there are some)
2. perhaps – bandwidth would be your primary concern since 5K calls
would take 150 M
found out that the best solution is to use OpenSips as SIP
OpenSIPS is a great free software proxy.
1- Is there any Software limitation on asterisk regarding number of
simulltaneous calls?
There isn't any explicit limitation in Asterisk or OpenSIPS that I'm aware of,
but you are limited to
You may be able to split up some of the servers into multiple VMs -- maybe
five servers with five VMs each.
I'm not sure I see the merit in this. VMs seem to be regarded as a magic
bullet (i.e. free lunch). I don't know of any case where 5 VMs can accomplish
more work on one processor than
Sorry for the top post.
If you have three remote offices and can control the routers, use a hardware
vpn router. I use netgear FVS318's and FVL328's. They are inexpensive and
functional for small offices and your server is not exposed.
Paul
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OpenVPN is pretty great I have learned (also free).
Sorry for the top post.
If you have three remote offices and can control the routers, use a
hardware
vpn router. I use netgear FVS318's and FVL328's. They are inexpensive
and
functional for small offices and your server is not exposed.
16 matches
Mail list logo
