Damian wrote: > Paul Mossman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Looking at XX-6450, it seems that we are indeed getting a > stand-alone > > process (jetty instance) for CounterPath provisioning. > > > > Just to confirm, this will show up as a new "Service" in sipXconfig? > > > > Yes. In a management bundle. The idea is if you don't have > counterpath plug-in you do not need to run such service. > sipXconfig and provisioning servers are usually separated: > Bria/Counterpath is the only exception: if sipXconfig is not > accesible you cannot configure Bria. Not a good thing > especially in a multi-branch environment. > > > It makes sense to make this a new "sipXprovision" service, > which could > > be used for XX-6550 as well. (See > > http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev/msg19585.html.) > > > > I am not sure if it make sense. My first instinct is to have > separate services for separate things. What would be the > advantage of having one service?
It sounds like they'll do the same thing: provide dynamic provisioning content. On a practical note though, XX-6450 is probably not on the verge of being submitted? In that case it doesn't make less work for XX-6550, so I'll consider the subject dropped. -Paul [email protected] _______________________________________________ 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/
