> >Hi all, > >I'm working on XCF-3026, which pertains to the configuration conference
>bridges. In brief: We are removing the functionality of adding/removing >conference bridges from the Conferencing section of the UI. Instead, the >"conference bridges" will be any FreeSWITCH services on any servers in >the cluster. To make sure we are on the same page: We would designate a server to be a conferencing server and then on that server the system installs FreeSWITCH with its respective config. Just the fact that FreeSWITCH runs on a server does not necessarily mean it is a conferencing server as it can be designated to other media services. --martin > >Damian started off this effort by creating a basic settings page for the >FreeSWITCH service. The problem is, that now we have a few duplicate >settings: > >SIP port - There is a "Conferencing Server SIP Port" setting in the >Bridge class, and "SIP Port" under the FreeSWITCH service configuration. >XML/RPC port - There is a "Provisioning port" setting in the Bridge >class, and "XML/RPC Port" under the FreeSWITCH service configuration. > >The other problem now is that we have two setting sets representing the >same thing - a FreeSWITCH service instance and a conference bridge are >one and the same. > >So, my first proposal here is to dump the Bridge class, and combine the >two setting models into just one. Then the information is not >duplicated, and is not split up between two sources. We don't need the >extra work of keeping an instance of a Bridge 'in sync' with a >FreeSWITCH service object. > >That said, I don't think the settings should all appear on the page for >editing the service. Service related parameters - the SIP port, XML-RPC >port, etc, belong in the service configuration page, but some parameters >- DTMF sequences, etc, I think still belong in the conferencing section >of the UI. > >So, in summary, my proposal is twofold: > >(1) Get rid of the Bridge class; and >(2) Split the settings for the FreeSWITCH service between the service >configuration page and the conferencing page, putting the settings where >they are most relevant. > >What do people think? Am I looking at this the wrong way? > >Joe > _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
