18 Jul
2006
18 Jul
'06
9:35 p.m.
actually xml-rpc and various AVP tracks should have been mentioned for sake
of completeness. Like with the other ones: that's good featrues but they
are sporadically documented.
-jiri
At 15:33 17/07/2006, Jiri Kuthan wrote:
I would say that SER has been capable of making major
design steps, such as
sanity overhaul of the underlying database structure, TCP processing,
timers, select operators, and so on.
The down-side is that those features have not yet been documented.
-jiri
At 12:06 16/07/2006, Greger V. Teigre wrote:
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
Well, trying to be a bit objective:
1. It depends on your needs
2. OpenSER has a more aggressive release policy (more newer features),
meaning that openser contains more functions and modules than ser
3. Latest SER is 0.9.x and is extremely stable
4. Openser 0.9.x and ser 0.9.x are (almost) close to identical. From
0.10 they start to diverge. SER 0.10 is not yet released, OpenSER has
reached 1.1
5. The type of features/functionality included in SER and openser are
likely to be quite different
6. OpenSER is currently better documented in the latest version
Have a look at the onsip.org Getting Started guide for more detail on
history.
g-)
Chahn John Kim wrote:
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/ I am a SER starter.
I have seen many subjects related to Openser.
Can someone shed a light on what are the differences between these?
And even some insights to suggest which may be better than the other?
We are planing to start business service shortly and we appreciate any
inputs on which SIP server infrastructure provides better performance and
scalability.
Thank you in advance.
John K.
_______________________________________________
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