On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 12:51 -0500, Paul Mossman wrote:
> 
> Scott wrote:
> > As part of our shift from administering distributed services by Role
> instead of by 
> > individual service processes, I think we should reorganize the system
> services display
> > so that the Role is given more prominence.
> > 
> > The current system display has the Role in the third (rightmost and so
> least important)
> > column, and services in the same role are not adjacent.
> > 
> > I'd like to suggest that the Role be moved to the leftmost column, and
> the display be 
> > organized hierarchically.
> 
> Looks good.
> 
> But is Call Control no longer also part of the Primary SIP Router role?

I made it just part of one to simplify the display.

I'm not at all clear on what it means for a service to be in more than
one role, or why Call Control is set up that way (I'd like to explore
that separately).

> Also, I guess the checkbox for each role should behave analogous to how
> the checkbox in the column header already behaves?  i.e. It's only a
> shortcut to bulk select/de-select the services in that role, and its
> value upon invoking the action is ultimately ignored. 

Yes, or perhaps those rows shouldn't have a checkbox at all.

> While we're on the topic, I propose a further change to this area.
> 
> System -> Servers shows a table of the servers in the cluster.  You can
> navigate to a server, and see the services running on it.  You can then
> select navigate to a service, and see its configuration.  
> 
> An example breadcrumb is: (System, the cluster ->) Servers ->
> branch1.example.com -> SIP Proxy.  The user is given the inaccurate
> impression that this is the configuration for the SIP Proxy service
> running on the branch1.example.com server.  It's actually the
> configuration for all SIP Proxy services in the cluster.  This is my
> complaint.
> 
> I propose that, since service configuration is not server-specific, we
> should take server out of the navigation path.

Agreed - that's confusing.

> The existing screen would be simplified.  It would now only be used to
> view/control the services running on the selected server.  (Remove the
> links from the service names.)
> 
> There would then be a new System -> Service Configuration screen,
> containing a table of all services known to sipXconfig.  The name of
> each service that has configuration would be a link to the screen
> containing that configuration.  Example breadcrumb: (System, the cluster
> ->) Service Configuration -> SIP Proxy.

Again, I'd like to see the Roles be more prominent in the organization,
but I certainly agree with the general idea.



_______________________________________________
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/

Reply via email to