Re: [Serusers] SIP Express Bundle. Step 1.

I would just suggest that you try to stay as distro-independent as possible, i.e. make it easy to switch to another distro and make it easy for people to bootstrap on another distro by looking at the dependencies (and maybe contribute their bootstrap script :-). As for config file, the ser-oob.cfg and ser.cfg that is generated by the buildsystem (sip_router/etc/buildsystem) are quite close. The buildsystem has a configure script that can be run as part of the bootstrap (it creates an m4 config file for local) or a web-based front-end can generate the config file quite easily. As I'm the maintainer of the buildsystem, I can promise some support if the system needs some adaption or the config file needs updating. I cannot speak for ser-oob.cfg, but as the idea is to show-case the iptel.org free SIP service config, I assume it will be more static. See config buildsystem docs: http://www.iptel.org/sip_express_router_configuration_buildsystem I'll follow the discussions and contribute where and when I can. g-) SIP wrote: > If no one else is going to come forward and second/debate Mike's > suggestion to use FC, and Mike's the man with the server, then I declare > this project officially FC-based. > > These are the people that have so far contacted me and are verified for > working on the SER Bundle Project, and for what tasks I have them available: > > Jai Rangi -- kickstart work in FC > Arun Kumar -- flexible > Samuel -- some time/flexible > ram -- testing > Mike Trest -- server, testing, FC wrangling > > Tasks we still need to fill (some of which can be filled perhaps by the > people listed above as flexible or others in the project): > > Core: > -SERWeb install/config > -RTP Proxy install/config (for base RTP proxy package -- not strictly > SER config) > -SEMS w/voicemail, away announcement, and conferencing support > install/config > > Tools: > All tools (ser_ctl, sipsak, tcpdump/ngrep, wireshark/tshark, sipp, > sip_scenario, spyagent+sipspy > > Also, with no install package for SER with a basic config, SER itself > will have to be installed/scripted to install with a tailored > config(ser-oob.cfg) for the correct system/parameters. I'm ASSUMING that > will go into the basic core install scripts, so I didn't add it in up > there, but if this is an invalid assumption, someone has to let me know > > > As you can see, if you're interested in being a part of this project and > can contribute time to getting it going, there are plenty of areas left > where we need people to help. Just let me know, and I'll add you to the > list. > > > > N. > > > Neil Fusillo wrote: > >> As long as the environment can be built to be stable, I'm in complete >> agreement. While our initial adopters may be the tinkerers and the >> risk-takers, I'd say that a good number of those people already try out >> SER (and may ultimately choose something with less of a learning >> curve). The biggest market for a SER bundle in the long run is going to >> be those who want to get a carrier grade SIP proxy up and running >> quickly and easily. Who that might be is somewhat difficult to >> determine, but I dare say we don't want to position ourselves as >> building a bundle for those who're willing to take risks. ;) >> >> That said, the decision for CentOS came about because it is simply a >> GPL-compliant duplicate distro of Red Hat Enterprise Linux -- the single >> most common and most popular distribution amongst people who run linux >> in a carrier-grade situation. >> >> Fedora Core, being the test bed for RHEL, has the same structure but >> newer, slightly less-vetted packages. However, if we can ensure >> stability, then none of that matters and no one will really care what >> distro it's built upon (as long as it's familiar to the admins who >> manage it). If you say you can build a stable FC-based SER server, then >> I say we go for it. >> >> Do we have a second to Mike's motion to use FC as the base distro? >> >> >> Mike Trest - Personal wrote: >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> This is to summarize my opinions about FC* distro use. >>> >>> IMHO, I think FC* is best selection as it contains many more fixes >>> than does the older CENTOS (based on 5). I have deployed several >>> hundred FC* boxes in VoIP applications. This is over 10,000 active >>> ports without "Enterprise" stability issues. >>> >>> IMHO this project needs the quickest path to the Enterprise community >>> regardless of the OS/distro used. >>> >>> I suppose the ultimate question is who is our target? Ourselves, >>> naturally. However, I suggest our target is not the bankers or >>> major corporations with lots of rules and procedures. That group >>> will never adopt SER until they have a commercial-grade support >>> system to advise their IT folks what to do for every question they may have. >>> >>> IMHO our initial target is those early adopters who are trying to >>> create new businesses in telecomm or consulting-on-telecom. We want >>> them to have a solid core that they can leverage into their new >>> appliances and specialized applications. >>> >>> The early adopters are risk-takers (This means us as well!) They >>> demand an open box in which they can face the SIP world with some >>> assurance of standards compliance while at the same time they can >>> face their clients with something better, faster, cheaper, and >>> innovative enough to get paid well for their efforts. >>> >>> Making a technology "buy - in" decision at any point in time is only >>> a check point - not a final resting place. IMHO, we are better off >>> selecting an OS/distro effort that has a large share of both early >>> adopters and long term commercial support - - - so long as it meets >>> our current and future technical **AND** target market >>> requirements. Research confirms that the RH/FC community is the >>> largest community with name recognition and respect among both the >>> "geek-innovator" community as well as the Enterprise community. >>> >>> ..mike.. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Serusers mailing list >>> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org >>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Serusers mailing list > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers > > >