Brent Franks wrote:
Aside from echo issues that seem to be apparent with everyone occasionally
(by everyone, those not running hardware T1 echo cans) I believe * is
ready for the prime time. Integrators however should have a better
I add to the list: hangup detection on FXO interfaces is
I hope we can get ISDN in Sao Paulo - we have been told it is available
as we are planning to deploy an Asterisk box in Brazil.
Having said this, Asterisk is what users make it. If you want R2
signalling (and I think a lot of people in South America do!) then
please get on and write the
Maybe, maybe not... Depending how one designs the GUI!
No, I think that GUIs though needed, do limit flexibility because the
information density is limited on the user-system direction (they are
better on the System-user end, however). However, this is NOT an
argument not to package
Yes, you are right!!
However, GUI for newbie's will help some people to overcome the first
hurdles, and then plunge into more advanced stuff!
One thing quote a lot of companies do is outsource the initial
configuration, because they simply don't have the technical skills
initially. But what
Chris Bond wrote:
Yes, you are right!!
However, GUI for newbie's will help some people to overcome the first
hurdles, and then plunge into more advanced stuff!
One thing quote a lot of companies do is outsource the initial
configuration, because they simply don't have the technical skills
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 07:06:22PM -0700, George Pajari wrote:
http://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/2004/0607faceoffyes.html
There are very valid arguments in the contra argument. If you have
existing equipment it's all about integration. Traditional telcos are
moving to VoIP as are enterprise
Steve Kennedy wrote:
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 07:06:22PM -0700, George Pajari wrote:
http://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/2004/0607faceoffyes.html
There are very valid arguments in the contra argument. If you have
existing equipment it's all about integration. Traditional telcos are
moving to
This is the traditional view of telecoms in large organisations. However
it seems in a lot of large companies they are dumping their existing
telecoms wholesale for an IP solution, on a site by site basis, as soon
as the maintainence contract renewal comes around. It surprises me to
see
Chris Bond wrote:
I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to manage
and add users and do anything you can do via a shell interface. If it had
that but on a simplified level (oblessly you can have an advanced mode too).
The power of asterisk comes from its method of
The power of asterisk comes from its method of config. If one wraps it
with a GUI one will inherently limit the flexibility.
Then since the GUI is what gets 'seen' people ~may~ take the lack of
flexibility or even just the look and flow of the GUI to be a reflection
on the power of
I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to
manage and add users and do anything you can do via a shell interface.
If it had that but on a simplified level (oblessly you can have an
advanced mode too).
There are many of them, and most of them aren't finished.
The
Message -
From: Jeremy McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source Telephony
Chris Bond wrote:
I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to
manage
and add
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Colin
Anderson
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:51 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld article on Open Source
Telephony
I like the way the 3com NBX system works. The web interface
A GUI for asterisk is really not that hard to make if what you
do is model the config files in the db. Once it's in the
DB all you have to do is the right queries to rebuild the files
when changes are made.
Then the gui can be totaly adaptable for any use.
I think it is posible to give a good
Of course, right now things
like * do not have an adequate reputation to pick up much of that
business. There is, however, a preparedness there for radical change.
When you are able to purchase support contracts on Asterisk (E.g. Yearly
(not hourly)) * will gain a lot of momentum. There
Jeremy McNamara wrote:
Chris Bond wrote:
I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to
manage and add users and do anything you can do via a shell
interface. If it had that but on a simplified level (oblessly you
can have an advanced mode too).
The power of
Need a good document for the Manager API before a GUI can be written!!!;)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Pablo Endres
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] NetworkWorld
Senad Jordanovic wrote:
Jeremy McNamara wrote:
Chris Bond wrote:
I think one thing * is lacking at the moment is a web interface to
manage and add users and do anything you can do via a shell
interface. If it had that but on a simplified level (oblessly you
can have an advanced mode too).
At 7:06 PM -0700 on 6/8/04, George Pajari wrote:
An interesting article for those needing ammunition to sell Asterisk within
their organisation or to others:
Is open source IP telephony ready for prime time? Yes
by Zenas Hutcheson, St. Paul Venture Capital
Network World, 06/07/04
John Todd wrote:
I am not saying that this is good or bad, actually. It's neutral. The
purpose of Open Source is not to defeat commercial implementations of
the same features, but to provide a better solution for some people
who want to get in there and make things work exactly they way they
20 matches
Mail list logo
