I think #webrtc is all the rage for all the good or wrong reasons :-)

Is indeed the wrong expectation that a sip server would need to handle this 
natively but people ask about this and other solutions are there to fill up the 
gap.

Adrian

On 17 Jun 2014, at 13:17, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[email protected]> wrote:

> Adrian,
> 
> We tried all the time to guide the opensips development (as project) based on 
> the community needs - basically you add features on demand/usage - you 
> mentioned you felt like "left behind feature-wise" - could you mention the 
> features you are missing (especially that you are a foundation member, and we 
> should provide guidance for the project). I'm all ears :).
> 
> It is more or less what I'm doing (as user) with the rtpproxy project - I 
> have the need for some missing features and I'm asking about the future plan.
> 
> Of course, there must be an understanding that different people doing 
> different things may have different needs - this is the beauty of an Open 
> Source project - different people, different needs, all combined into a 
> unitary effort.
> 
> Regards,
>  Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
> On 13.06.2014 20:55, [email protected] wrote:
>> Guys,
>> 
>> All these softwares are mature with many years in service both for the media 
>> relays and the SIP part. They deal find with most of the expected failures, 
>> which is what the customers expect. For the un-expected failures, well the 
>> sky if the limit for optimising with infinite cost/benefit ratio. I 
>> personally did not hear my customers asking for any more resilience or 
>> scalability for the media relay component, so I stopped optimising long time 
>> ago.
>> 
>> A better question is where would OpenSIPS project go next, beyond 
>> optimisations, as the outside world does not stay still and the perception 
>> of some of my customers is that we are being left behind feature-wise.
>> 
>> Adrian
>> 
>> On 13 Jun 2014, at 14:18, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Maxim,
>>> 
>>> It is good to know about the rtp_cluster, but aside simplifying things, it 
>>> does not bring any new functionality - the LB and failover between RTPproxy 
>>> nodes can be done now in OpenSIPS module .
>>> The most challenging thing we are looking at is the ability to move calls 
>>> between different instances of RTPP (for HA purposes)..or some restart 
>>> persistence for the sessions - without something like that it's very hard 
>>> to deal with SW/HW failures ; there are ways to go around for scheduled 
>>> stops/restarts (maintenance), but non for unexpected failures.    
>>> 
>>> Thanks and Regards,
>>>  Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>> On 13.06.2014 00:36, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
>>>> Brett, on the HA/carrier-grade side there is little-advertized 
>>>> middle-layer component called "rtp_cluster", which in essence is 
>>>> load-balancing, transparent dispatcher that can be inserted in between 
>>>> some call-controlling component like OpenSIPS or Sippy B2BUA and bunch of 
>>>> RTPP instances running on the same or multiple nodes. From the point of 
>>>> view of that OpenSIPS it's just another RTPP instance.
>>>> 
>>>> And it handles all logic necessary to load-balance incoming requests 
>>>> between online instances plus it can handle dynamic re-confiduration of 
>>>> the cluster and track individual nodes going up and down. The code is 
>>>> pretty usable, we have it deployed for several customers and it's being 
>>>> actively developed as well. We have it working reliably controlling up to 
>>>> 30-40 RTPP instances scattered over at least 5 nodes.
>>>> 
>>>> http://sourceforge.net/p/sippy/sippy/ci/master/tree/rtp_cluster/
>>>> 
>>>> We have at least one pretty well known service provider whose name starts 
>>>> with capital V using it in combination with OpenSIPS to load balance RTP 
>>>> traffic                   via bunch of Amazon EC2 instances.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Brett Nemeroff <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Just wanted to add my 0.02 here.. 
>>>> 
>>>> I totally agree with Bogdan. For the applications where opensips + a RTP 
>>>> relay make sense, HA and persistence are much more important. 
>>>> 
>>>> WebRTC and ICE are kinda applications in of themselves. And although these 
>>>> applications are going to grow in popularity, the "legacy" needs for an 
>>>> RTP relay are still massively prevalent in the space. A general push 
>>>> towards "Carrier Grade", resiliency and redundancy I think is much better 
>>>> for the project as a whole. 
>>>> 
>>>> Not only that, consider that applications requiring ICE or WebRTC will 
>>>> greatly benefit from HA / persistence, but not so much the other way 
>>>> around :) 
>>>> 
>>>> YMMV
>>>> 
>>>> -Brett
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 6:30 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>> 
>>>> As always, the truth is in the middle.
>>>> 
>>>> I agree RTPP is behind on certain things (and this is why we want to do 
>>>> them), but on the other hand it is a good platform with other good 
>>>> features (missing on the other relays). RTPP has better ability in 
>>>> individually controlling the stream (audio /video), ability to set 
>>>> timeouts and onhold with no conflicts, ability to generates events on 
>>>> timeout, more flexibility in handling symmetric / asymmetric NATs, ability 
>>>> to do media injection (playback), ability to do call recording
>>>> 
>>>> What neither  mediaproxy, nor rtpengine have is a mechanism for 
>>>> implementing RTP failover (for ongoing calls) or restart persistence . 
>>>> This is something we want to look into. I would love to have ICE and 
>>>> WebRTC on my media relay, for the HA and persistence are more important I 
>>>> would say.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>>  Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>>> On 24.05.2014 01:59, Muhammad Shahzad Shafi wrote:
>>>>> To be honest, i have stopped using rtpproxy for over 2 years now. It is 
>>>>> not evolving as fast as it should be, specially in the context of ICE and 
>>>>> WebRTC technologies.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would like to suggest that opensips team should consider adding support 
>>>>> for rtpengine from SIPWise,
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://github.com/sipwise/rtpengine
>>>>> 
>>>>> For now mediaproxy from AG Projects is the only good choice for handling 
>>>>> media in opensips with ICE support (though it still lacks WebRTC 
>>>>> features).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> On 2014-05-23 14:55, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Going for a public exposure on this question to Maxim, maybe we will get 
>>>>>> an answer here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>> Subject: RTPproxy project
>>>>>> Date:    Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:03:31 +0300
>>>>>> From:    Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>>>>> To:      Maxim Sobolev
>>>>>> CC:      Razvan Crainea
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hello Maxim,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Long time, no talks, but I hope everything is fine on your side.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm reaching you in order to ask about your future plans in regards to 
>>>>>> the rtpproxy project? We see no much activity around it and other media 
>>>>>> relays are popping around.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> RTPP is an essential component for us, we invested a lot of work, we 
>>>>>> have many patches (extensions) for it (which we want to push to the 
>>>>>> public tree, but there is no answer on this) and we are also looking for 
>>>>>> investing a lot into big future plans (as adding more functionalities).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Now, my question is - what is your commitment and disponibility for the 
>>>>>> RTPP project ? depending on that we what to re-position ourselves, as we 
>>>>>> do not want to waste time and work on things which are out of control.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>>>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>>>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen
>>>>> Muhammad Shahzad
>>>>> -----------------------------------
>>>>> CISCO Rich Media Communication Specialist (CRMCS)
>>>>> CISCO Certified Network Associate (CCNA)
>>>>> Cell: +49 176 99 83 10 85
>>>>> MSN: [email protected]
>>>>> Email: [email protected]
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Users mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Users mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Devel mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Maksym Sobolyev
>>>> Sippy Software, Inc.
>>>> Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts
>>>> Tel (Canada): +1-778-783-0474
>>>> Tel (Toll-Free): +1-855-747-7779
>>>> Fax: +1-866-857-6942
>>>> Web: http://www.sippysoft.com
>>>> MSN: [email protected]
>>>> Skype: SippySoft
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Devel mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to