On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 10:54 -0400, Dale Worley wrote: > According to the Wiki, a branch always has autonomous PSTN connectivity, > and that an apparent branch without its own PSTN connectivity is not a > branch itself, but a part of another branch. > > It seems to me that this is not the requirement we want, because it > relaxes the survivability requirement for service in a (physical) branch > office that has no PSTN connectivity -- it is not required to have its > own proxy/registrar and is not required to survive if connectivity to > its "real" branch is maintained. > > This seems a poor idea because broken WAN connections are probably the > most likely failure mode. Unless it is a fact about the market that > every physical location will have its own PSTN connectivity, we want to > remove the requirement that branches all have PSTN connectivity.
I put that restriction into the requirements because survivability doesn't seem to me to mean all that much if you don't have local PSTN connectivity. If you rely on the central system for PSTN, and you can't reach even the central system, you don't have much left. That having been said, I don't think that the restriction means very much in the end, and removing it wouldn't have much effect on the design. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
