> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. Ranganathan [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:54 PM
> To: Mossman, Paul AVAYA (CAR:9D30)
> Cc: Chu, Xingjun AVAYA (CAR:9D70); Ranganathan, Mudumbai AVAYA
> (CONST:9D30); Lawrence, Scott AVAYA (BL60:9D30); sipx-
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [sipX-dev] A proposal regarding model of gateway <->ITSP
> account insipX
> 
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Paul Mossman <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Ranga wrote:
> >> The current GUI implicitly supposes a 1-1 mapping between
> >> ITSP and gateway. What we need is a many to one mapping from
> >> gateway to ITSP account.
> >
> > Why is the 1-1 mapping bad?
> 
> >
> > In most cases the mapping is 1-1.  In the few cases it isn't 1-1,
> then
> > the admin needs to enter the same ITSP credentials a couple of extra
> > times.  Minor inconvenience.
> 
> 
> I guess it is fine. Not the design I would prefer but we can revisit
> the GUI issue later.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > On the other hand, introducing the notion of an ITSP Account that
> must
> > be independently created/configured, and then linked back to a
> Gateway
> > instance...  That's a lot of complexity to add for minimal benefit in
> a
> > minority of scenarios.
> 
> They are logically different things. Hence they should be configured
> independently ( at least that is my notion of good GUI design).
> 
> An ITSP record is distinct from another ITSP record if  :
> 
> Domain is different
> OR user name is different
> OR proxy address is different
> OR registrar address is different
> OR ITSP proxy port is different
> OR registrar port is different.


Ranga, 

A few questions, 

Why ITSP account needs to have registrar information, is that required by 
sipxbridge for what purpose? 

Also in the current UI, I didn't find "proxy address" in ITSP account 
configuration UI. 
(I didn't see "domain name" either in ITSP UI, but I always assume you mean 
"ITSP server address" by domain name, it that correct? )

Thanks
Jason

> ....
> 
> There are quite a few fields on the ITSP screen.
> 
> We can make some simplifying assumptions. I think
> 
> User Name and domain would be enough to cover almost all cases. i.e.
> if you have two accounts from the same ITSP then they must have
> different user names to be considered different.
> 
> However, I do not consider this very good user interface design
> because if you have two identical ones with conflicting settings in
> any of the other parameters ( for example any of the advanced
> parameters)  which one will you pick?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >> Also, you can enter identical ITSP information twice in the
> >> GUI in which case  you get two records in sipxbridge.xml
> >> which are identical except for the line ID. This is unacceptable.
> >
> > Yes.  The sipxbridge.xml generation problem should be fixed.  That's
> the
> > root problem behind XX-4785 right?
> 
> Of course it is just a detail and not the root problem of 4785..
> 
> I do not recall making the claim that it is the "root problem behind
> xx-4785"
> 
> It is not valid data design to have multiple records for a single
> ITSP. I think we agree on this point.  What would you do if you have
> two ITSP accounts that have the same name and domain but differ on one
> of the other settings ? I assume you would generate two accounts. That
> is how  your UI design affects your generated sipxbridge.xml
> 
> 
> I think it is best to defer this feature rather than implement it in a
> suboptimal fashion.
> 
> 
> >
> > If the current UI somehow prevents this fix, then please explain how.
> 
> 
> See above. The UI does not prevent the fix but it can lead to
> conflicts. So long as you are willing to flag the conflict and not
> accept invalid configurations UI does not preclude the fix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ranga
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> > -Paul
> > [email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> M. Ranganathan
_______________________________________________
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