On Friday, 14 January, 2011 03:28 AM, Eric Hernaez wrote:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:35 PM, [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 13:00:15 -0500, Roman Gelfand wrote:
> Has anyone used OpenSBC with SIPX? Do they work well together?
Although I had my own gremlins to deal with, opensbc seemed to
work perfectly.
I believe the developer is now involved with this project in some
way or another.
Perhaps opensbc will be integrated at some point?
It's been a while since I have done any testing, but my recollection
is that it works with two caveats:
1. No MOH
2. Calling party does not get ringback when calls are transferred
from the auto-attendant to an extension
These limitations are caused by the way that OpenSBC handles SIP
REFER, and may possibly be overcome if you also used the sipxbridge
(at the time, we used OpenSBC in place of sipxbridge).
Joegen Baclor, the OpenSBC author, is part of this list and can surely
give more details about any plans he may have for future integration
with SIPX
Hey Eric,
Nice to see you here! Indeed OpenSBC will not take care of MOH. It
will simply take care of NAT traversal. Ringback and MOH are pretty
much in the same boat so no to that either. I have coding some
freeswitch api stuffs recently. Enough to say that integration of
libfreeswitch into OpenSBC, (which was long part of my long list of
plans to improve on the project) could probably be the answer to
OpenSBC's shortcomings in terms of MoH and ringback.
Joegen
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
