Merged #152.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/pull/152#event-132209210___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Thank you all for the work invested in this new module. I uploaded it on trunk
(with some bug fixes, additional renaming and updates).
@rfuchs , it will be nice to have an email sent to out on the lists to
introduce this module to the users - let me know if you need any assistance
from me.
---
Thanks! Meanwhile there is a bunch of patches with a new functionality and
bugfixes to merge. Stay tuned!
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/pull/152#issuecomment-46319784___
Devel mailing list
What you said leads to an important question (almost to forget about it :) ) -
who will be the maintainer of this module, like taking care of it, patching,
etc ? We can grand GIT access to avoid going via push requests for every tiny
change :)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on
Just to clear things up, I had no part in porting this module to opensips other
than the original implementation from which it is derived.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
I guess it is reasonable that nobody expects a developer to stretch to manage
his stuff across external forks. I am not maintaining MediaProxy in Kamailio
project either, if there are volunteers there it is fine but if they are not,
then end-users have indeed a problem with any such fork.
I
If the module is renamed to match the actual engine, I see no problem.
Unfortunately we cannot add it to 1.11 as it is already beta released - only
fixes accepted, no new things.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Peter, what do you think about renaming module? Let's add it into master.
--
Nick
2014-04-08 16:26 GMT+04:00 Bogdan Andrei IANCU notificati...@github.com:
If the module is renamed to match the actual engine, I see no problem.
Unfortunately we cannot add it to 1.11 as it is already beta
@nikbyte already done - see the latest commits above (
lemenkov/opensips@a11b4091496ebd70b5eac42d3483e7d85d2c71fc )
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/pull/152#issuecomment-39850530___
Devel
Bogdan, about 10 days ago the mediaproxy-ng project was renamed into
rtpengine. What about to add new module with this name? As for me, I'd like
to use rtpengine for a long time, but I've never had a module. And I'm
unhappy that we will have this module only in trunk, but not in 1.11.
--
Nick
Speaking with my @sipwise hat on, there will be a name change of at least the
mediaproxy-ng back-end part soon, to clear things up for the future. I
understand the concerns of AG in regards to name clashing, and we don't like
the confusion either. No plans yet for the rtpproxy-ng module name
Hi Andreas,
Not sure if you are referring to me but in case you do. I am not demanding any
apology. Personally, I have no issue with the name you have chosen. If you
knowingly chose that name mediaproxy-ng which I was using since 2008 and
expected me to complain about it, is really weird. I am
Adrian, you were are asking @rfuchs to admit his mistake in naming the project
and you proposed a draft in his name on how he should have approached the
opensips project properly.
This is ridiculous, as the ongoing efforts to bring all this to opensips (where
it seems to cause the confusion)
Even if this new protocol (rtpproxy-ng) is based on the original rtpproxy
protocol, naming it as rtpproxy-ng seems a bad idea IMHO as it will generate
unavoidable confusion. The fact that the Sippy RTP relayer is named RtpProxy
(same name as the protocol) does not help, and things become worse
Call it fuchs-relay, sipwise-relay or anything else but rtpproxy and mediaproxy
as they have nothing to do with any of them.
Adrian
Pe 22.02.2014, la 12:13, Richard Fuchs notificati...@github.com a scris:
Correct, the protocol is different and incompatible, but heavily based on the
As for me I really dislike the idea of renaming this module. This module is
named after the protocol, not after the backend. Exactly the same situation
with rtpproxy module - it implements a protocol, not a particular backend
support. One can use rtpproxy module not only with RTPproxy from
Also I really don't like the direction this discussion is going. Folks, let's
just calm down for a while and focus on a technical issues. I have a plenty of
patches on top of the original module to be reviewed and I'd love to hear any
feedback on them :)
---
Reply to this email directly or
@lemenkov , I agree, the modules should be named after the protocol it
implements. BUT, as far as I understood from @rfuchs's posts this new module
has nothing to do with the classical known RTPproxy protocol (used by RTPProxy
application). The new protocol is binary, json oriented, etc..
Maybe
Correct, the protocol is different and incompatible, but heavily based on the
original rtpproxy protocol in terms of functionality. The protocol offers all
the same flags that the original rtpproxy protocol supported, just transported
in a different way to allow it to be extended freely. Also,
Hello @bogdan-iancu !
First of all do NOT merge it at least during the next few monts - it's stil in
a w.i.p. stage and I see some errors and suspicious warnings during operation.
Also I've got few patches from your twin project to cheryr-pick. Please give me
more time to polish that.
This is
@lemenkov thanks for the update...I'm a but confused and puzzled. .The
media engine from sipwise is called mediaproxy-ng, but has noting to do to with
mediaproxy from AG-projects (not even a fork) - how comes this ???
Further more, why to name the module in OpenSIPS rtpproxy-ng, while it has
As the author of mediaproxy-ng, let me try to clear up the confusion about the
naming.
Many moons ago, the team at Sipwise was using a privately developed, closed
source RTP proxy. It was designed to be used with the Openser mediaproxy
module, and as such we called our project mediaproxy, even
Why don’t you simply call it
sipwise-rtp-mediarelay
or something similar so is beyond doubt who made it and where it fits or does
not fit.
Secondly mediaproxy-ng.org domain name was used by AG Projects for many years
for hosting our MediaProxy software version.
Regards,
Adrian
On 21 Feb
Hi all,
I agree with @saghul - I also prefer to avoid confusions as much as possible.
Also I understand what @rfuchs explains (as history).
What I'm concerned of :
- in regards to the media engine - I disagree with the name of the sipwise
media engine (as conflicts with something existing);
Hi Richard,
As you are the author then change your software name to straigthen things out.
The problem is then solved elegantly, we all benefit of your addition to the
project and you take all the credits!
--
Adrian
On 21 Feb 2014, at 16:21, Richard Fuchs notificati...@github.com wrote:
Actually it's not all that easy. Plus, I find it silly to argue about a mere
name like that.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/OpenSIPS/opensips/pull/152#issuecomment-35787429___
Devel mailing list
Hello Richard,
This is not silly. Is very healthy to argue about it, now that the time has
come. Here it is what you wrote:
Many moons ago, the team at Sipwise was using a privately developed, closed
source RTP proxy. It was designed to be used with the Openser mediaproxy
module, and as such
It wasn't me who asked for this module to be included in your project. I only
provided an explanation of why things were named the way they are. The original
rtpproxy-ng module is called rtpproxy-ng because it's based on the module named
rtpproxy. For now, it happens to work only with a
Hi @lemenkov - this rtpproxy_ng module..what is the difference from the
existing rtpproxy module ?
Thanks and regards,
Bogdan
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Hello All!
I#39;ve made some preliminary work on porting rtpproxy-ng from Kamailio to
OpenSIPS. Unfortunately I#39;m not certain about my patches#39; quality and
love to get any possible feedback on this. Could anyone please review this and
help me merging it into OpenSIPS? Also any testing
30 matches
Mail list logo
