Hello everybody,
A new project - OpenSIPs (Open SIP Server) - became active today, with its first release (OpenSIPS 1.4.0).
What is OpenSIPS about?
OpenSER History: ---------------- Voice System started the OpenSER project with a vision of running an open project that will deliver a professional software. Along the years Voice System was the main contributor and sustainer of the OpenSER project, organizing conferences, events and tutorials, all aiming to consolidate OpenSER as a top solution for industry VoIP.
OpenSER Issues: ---------------
In the past time, several critical problems related to OpenSER project were identified by us: - the need for a new reliable release - delayed or low-quality releases are affecting the credibility of the project - degradation of the project quality - testing, performance measurements and code quality control are overlooked - lack of the control, management and coordination of the project - critical project issues could not be handled or solved
OpenSIPS Solutions: --------------------
OpenSIPS is a continuation of the OpenSER project - we have a moral obligation to develop and deliver the high quality and reliable software we envisioned when starting OpenSER.
1) a 6 months release cycle, but with no compromise for the technical issues 2) extensive testing and performance measurements before each major release 3) contributions are guaranteed to be answered and integrated (if accepted) in less than 1 month 4) code review, architecture control and integrated design for software quality 5) technical management with a strict developer hierarchy and developer cooperation to prevent deadlocks or un-availabilities 6) intellectual honesty by having decisions taken on value-based criteria and arguments.
To find more about the project, see the official web page : http://www.opensips.org
OpenSIPS 1.4.0 release: -----------------------
First major release of OpenSIPS is n**ow available. It incorporates new functionalities like
* dialog profiling extension * local route for internally generated requests * dial plan / translation module * general NAT traversal module (for non-invite signalling) * peering and rate limit (traffic shaping) modules
, enhancements like:
* SRV load balancing (based on weights) * nonce re-usage verification (safer authentication)
and bug fixing - code, specs and functionality bugs.
The full Changelog is available on the web site:
To get the OpenSIPS 1.4.0 version, see the download page at: http://www.opensips.org/index.php?n=Resources.Downloads
Best regards, Bogdan
hi bogdan,
i'm trying to understand this in order figure out what to do in the future.
- the need for a new reliable release - delayed or low-quality releases
are affecting the credibility of the project
are all the open dialog and tm related issues on openser tracker fixed in opensips?
- degradation of the project quality - testing, performance measurements
and code quality control are overlooked
i have been actively testing and measuring trunk version of openser since january. i assume that many others have been doing the same. could you be more specific?
- lack of the control, management and coordination of the project -
critical project issues could not be handled or solved
are you referring the local route issue? it was finally solved, but perhaps not to everybody's liking, which is normal in any democratic process.
- a 6 months release cycle, but with no compromise for the technical
issues
what does that mean?
- extensive testing and performance measurements before each major
release
how is that managed?
- technical management with a strict developer hierarchy and developer
cooperation to prevent deadlocks or un-availabilities
how does this hierarchy currently look like? i didn't find anything about it on opensips web site. is there a technical "president" or "king" at the top of the hierarchy?
- intellectual honesty by having decisions taken on value-based
criteria and arguments.
how does this work with the strict 6 month release cycle?
i don't claim that openser project has worked flawlessly, but the description in opensips announcement does not yet convince me either.
-- juha
Hi Juha,
Juha Heinanen wrote:
hi bogdan,
i'm trying to understand this in order figure out what to do in the future.
- the need for a new reliable release - delayed or low-quality releases
are affecting the credibility of the project
are all the open dialog and tm related issues on openser tracker fixed in opensips?
shortly yes, and not limited to. but that issues are just couple of the problems preventing the openser release - and are reflecting only the visible technical part. We should not overlook all the management for preparing the release and how the whole process is handled (or miss-handled).
- degradation of the project quality - testing, performance measurements
and code quality control are overlooked
i have been actively testing and measuring trunk version of openser since january. i assume that many others have been doing the same. could you be more specific?
Exactly this is the issue - people assumed that maybe somebody else is doing something about testing and measurements, but there is no consolidation on project level (only at personal level). In most of the cases, just assuming, we end up in actually having nobody doing this. In the last releases, it happend several times to discover some obviously problem right after the release.
- lack of the control, management and coordination of the project -
critical project issues could not be handled or solved
are you referring the local route issue? it was finally solved, but perhaps not to everybody's liking, which is normal in any democratic process.
not really - I do not refer to local route issue. From management point of view, simply review the board list to see what I'm referring at (how the critical issues related to the very existence of the project were handles - like changing the project name). Also "cawboys" like decisions - like revoking my project admin rights with no noticed just because I start working on OpenSIPS - and without expresing yet my position regarding OpenSER (if I still want to be involved or not). Technically speaking also, the decisions are taken in the "wild - cawboy" manner.
- a 6 months release cycle, but with no compromise for the technical
issues
what does that mean?
it means we will try to do a release at each 6 month, but no release will be done just because of the deadline while technical problems are still pending. Also a better pre- scheduling of the work will make more efficient the release progress. We have to admit there is a need for a better control and management.
- extensive testing and performance measurements before each major
release
how is that managed?
during the release cycle, the important steps like testing (join effort) are mandatory
- technical management with a strict developer hierarchy and developer
cooperation to prevent deadlocks or un-availabilities
how does this hierarchy currently look like? i didn't find anything about it on opensips web site. is there a technical "president" or "king" at the top of the hierarchy?
no :). the hierarchy is at follows (I will also upload it on the web): 1) core developers - they take design and arch decisions (the guys with the big picture), agree on accepting new modules; they have the last word in the technical issue (if not already solved below). 2) module maintainers - they maintain certain modules and take care all decision regarding their modules. For changes out of their scope, they need to address to level 1) 3) contributors - (see http://opensips.org/index.php?n=Development.Contributing)
any issues will be solved bottom up - if a current level is not able to solve it, it will be pushed to the upper level.
Regarding the "un-availability" - each module will end up having multiple (compatible) maintainers, so some code will not end up depending of the availability of only one person.
- intellectual honesty by having decisions taken on value-based
criteria and arguments.
how does this work with the strict 6 month release cycle?
as said, the 6 months release cycle is targeted if there are not technical stoppers - like fixing thinks or the need for a large work that may exceed 6 months. The critical need is to have pertinent decisions (in any context), based on value and arguments and not just baseless opinions
i don't claim that openser project has worked flawlessly, but the description in opensips announcement does not yet convince me either
I think no announcement can convince when comes to large projects. How things will progress (or how things are already progressing) will convince. Personally I put more trust in actions than in words.
Regards, Bogdan
On Monday 04 August 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
[..] not really - I do not refer to local route issue. From management point of view, simply review the board list to see what I'm referring at (how the critical issues related to the very existence of the project were handles - like changing the project name). Also "cawboys" like decisions - like revoking my project admin rights with no noticed just because I start working on OpenSIPS - and without expresing yet my position regarding OpenSER (if I still want to be involved or not). Technically speaking also, the decisions are taken in the "wild - cawboy" manner.
Hi Bogdan,
just reply to this specific point: i also removed some of them as "emergency action". I was suprised and disappointed, and want to play safe. Perhaps we can discuss on the board if you still wants to be involved.
Cheers,
Henning
Hi Henning,
Not sure why there was a need for "emergency action" - is it a kind of war or what? :) . Cannot figure out what was the logic behind, but this kind of hustle decisions (no consultation, no reason, just a wild-wild-west cowboy action) made me make my move. A project needs to offer stability and reliability and this "out-of-control" kind of management does not help at all. I hope you can understand my reason for creating OpenSIPS.
Also, I'm ready to overlook this "not-nice" action, so granting back my admin rights on the OpenSER project will be an act of respect.
Thank you, Bogdan
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Monday 04 August 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
[..] not really - I do not refer to local route issue. From management point of view, simply review the board list to see what I'm referring at (how the critical issues related to the very existence of the project were handles - like changing the project name). Also "cawboys" like decisions - like revoking my project admin rights with no noticed just because I start working on OpenSIPS - and without expresing yet my position regarding OpenSER (if I still want to be involved or not). Technically speaking also, the decisions are taken in the "wild - cawboy" manner.
Hi Bogdan,
just reply to this specific point: i also removed some of them as "emergency action". I was suprised and disappointed, and want to play safe. Perhaps we can discuss on the board if you still wants to be involved.
Cheers,
Henning
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Henning,
Not sure why there was a need for "emergency action" - is it a kind of war or what? :) . Cannot figure out what was the logic behind, but this kind of hustle decisions (no consultation, no reason, just a wild-wild-west cowboy action) made me make my move. A project needs to offer stability and reliability and this "out-of-control" kind of management does not help at all. I hope you can understand my reason for creating OpenSIPS.
It was also not very helpful having a board member which does not answer emails.
regards klaus
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Henning,
Not sure why there was a need for "emergency action" - is it a kind of war or what? :) . Cannot figure out what was the logic behind, but this kind of hustle decisions (no consultation, no reason, just a wild-wild-west cowboy action) made me make my move. A project needs to offer stability and reliability and this "out-of-control" kind of management does not help at all. I hope you can understand my reason for creating OpenSIPS.
It was also not very helpful having a board member which does not answer emails.
I will correct this and say "having board member*s*...." - anyhow this is a very common practice over there. If it took 5 months just to really start a discussion about the new name, I have nothing to comment more.
Regard, Bogdan
On Tuesday 05 August 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Not sure why there was a need for "emergency action" - is it a kind of war or what? :) . Cannot figure out what was the logic behind, but this kind of hustle decisions (no consultation, no reason, just a wild-wild-west cowboy action) made me make my move. A project needs to offer stability and reliability and this "out-of-control" kind of management does not help at all. I hope you can understand my reason for creating OpenSIPS.
Also, I'm ready to overlook this "not-nice" action, so granting back my admin rights on the OpenSER project will be an act of respect.
Hi Bogdan,
well, one could imagine all possible ways you could want to harm the kamailio project, now as you started over again with your own stuff. Perhaps we can discuss this next week in Bucarest on a personal level.
Cheers,
Henning
Hi Henning,
I found it an illogical reaction. Probably you have a total false vision of my action - I only want to move on with the work I'm doing in a way I consider more productive.
Thanks and regards, Bogdan
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Tuesday 05 August 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Not sure why there was a need for "emergency action" - is it a kind of war or what? :) . Cannot figure out what was the logic behind, but this kind of hustle decisions (no consultation, no reason, just a wild-wild-west cowboy action) made me make my move. A project needs to offer stability and reliability and this "out-of-control" kind of management does not help at all. I hope you can understand my reason for creating OpenSIPS.
Also, I'm ready to overlook this "not-nice" action, so granting back my admin rights on the OpenSER project will be an act of respect.
Hi Bogdan,
well, one could imagine all possible ways you could want to harm the kamailio project, now as you started over again with your own stuff. Perhaps we can discuss this next week in Bucarest on a personal level.
Cheers,
Henning
On Tuesday 05 August 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
I found it an illogical reaction. Probably you have a total false vision of my action - I only want to move on with the work I'm doing in a way I consider more productive.
Hello Bogdan,
well, i think that this project consists of more people then you. And the people don't expect us to behave like in some sort of "kindergarden" (a bunch of people used this term in privat conversations, so its not soley my own impression). As Alex pointed out, we should really try to:
.. to work your differences out, compromise, standardise, and merge the code back into one project so that we can all continue to enjoy, evolve and innovate with the best, most extensible, polymorphic and featureful SIP server out there.
Otherwise we'll have now two projects that will diverge over time, users must make their choice, the developer base will be partitoned. Certain bugs will only be fixed in one project and so on.
The code base is already to huge to be understandable from one person. And it certainly make no real sense to complicate the work even further. As pointed out from some other guys, way more bigger projects like KDE or linux kernel managed to work together toward one goal, with occasional fights, but without a split.
So i ask you, what is that special about the actual sitation that you think this fork is the only way? I think that people expect us to find a better solution.
Cheers,
Henning
To all:
As a user/integrator of OpenSer I am alerted by these discussions. I do not have any background why the project splitted into 2 parts, I can only imagine. But at least I can see that the community is splitted into 2 parts, and there is a very problematic conversation going on with some fingerpointing from both sides, which will surely have some background. As a user looking from outside I cannot judge who is right or who is wrong. But the more I read these mails I have the feeling that life with "OpenSER" will become difficult in the future. And uncertainty is always the worst of all prospects.
So please: In order not to confuse the latest user, can you please do your discussions on a different platform, solve it there and come back with a solution or statement within a reasonable time? You may call me naive but the current way of discussing creates the biggest damage I can imagine for OpenSER and it's fork(s).
Best regards Peter
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu schrieb:
Hi Henning,
I found it an illogical reaction. Probably you have a total false vision of my action - I only want to move on with the work I'm doing in a way I consider more productive.
Thanks and regards, Bogdan
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Tuesday 05 August 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Not sure why there was a need for "emergency action" - is it a kind of war or what? :) . Cannot figure out what was the logic behind, but this kind of hustle decisions (no consultation, no reason, just a wild-wild-west cowboy action) made me make my move. A project needs to offer stability and reliability and this "out-of-control" kind of management does not help at all. I hope you can understand my reason for creating OpenSIPS.
Also, I'm ready to overlook this "not-nice" action, so granting back my admin rights on the OpenSER project will be an act of respect.
Hi Bogdan,
well, one could imagine all possible ways you could want to harm the kamailio project, now as you started over again with your own stuff. Perhaps we can discuss this next week in Bucarest on a personal level.
Cheers,
Henning
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Please excuse me interrupting this discussion a bit. If I'm flat wrong, off base or rude I apologize in advance.
1) I think some technical opinions and observations may have merit and even if they don't are at worst, good best practices. a. Increasing the QA and testing between releases.
2) IMHO the name kamailio sucks. (Who cares right?) a. Others have expressed this same opinion and provided at least a logical argument against it. The point here is maybe if more than one person says it.. Someone should listen? Maybe there could be a private discussion for a new name? Sorry to those who put effort into renaming and moving things already, but rather now than later, right? Seriously, two things here are important.. brand and listening/responding to the /community/
3) Everything else at this point really comes down to communication and egos. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have no idea why there's a division between the developers now, but whatever good/bad/no communication happened in the past I hope it can be resolved.
Main points if not obvious..
1) Only one rename of OpenSER is going to thrive and gain support. (If I had to guess)
2) In the entire history of open source.. Who has *ever* heard of a core committer doing something malicious!?! This isn't some draconian corporate environment where your access is cut off before you get your pink slip. Anyway, it's under revision control and backed up. Not that this is any of my business, but I hope it's been corrected already.
The bottom line.. I don't know who is more right or wrong in all this and don't care.. If possibly.. can both sides propose some middle ground (ASAP) so everything minus the name can go back to the way it was before...
Most Humbly,
./Christopher
Hello,
On 08/05/08 16:20, C. Bergström wrote:
Please excuse me interrupting this discussion a bit. If I'm flat wrong, off base or rude I apologize in advance.
- I think some technical opinions and observations may have merit and
even if they don't are at worst, good best practices. a. Increasing the QA and testing between releases.
I believe there is not enough whatever one will do with testing and QA. I have 1.4.0 in production in couple of sites, but only with the modules I use/need. Also, the ones following the developer mailing list are aware of a test suite created by Henning Westerholt that is designed to detect errors and report regression tests. Nothing is done over the night, but that test suite is up and running on devel.openser.org, and will be enhanced as we go. For the 1.3.x release, if using it in production for about 2 millions users is not a good testing and QA, I cannot add more:
http://www.ilocus.com/2008/03/the_largest_voip_offering_base.html
- IMHO the name kamailio sucks. (Who cares right?) a. Others have expressed this same opinion and provided at least a
logical argument against it. The point here is maybe if more than one person says it.. Someone should listen? Maybe there could be a private discussion for a new name? Sorry to those who put effort into renaming and moving things already, but rather now than later, right? Seriously, two things here are important.. brand and listening/responding to the /community/
We are listening and trust me it is very hard to find new names. It is very laborious process in checking trademarks, possible infringements and so on. The old name was attacked because of the "ser" part in it (has nothing to do with the old project and companies around it, but something totally different). It started the idea of finding something different, with no direct relation, as telecom world is one of the toughest in this aspects, and words related to protocols and combinations are already accounted.
Nobody claimed is the best and if you have new proposals, just write. Others are welcome as well. We are a community here, but everybody must understand that first we needed to protect from current issues, to be in a safe place. These are rather delicate things and avoiding court trials is advisable. If there is a new proposal, supported by community at large, I am sure there are solutions. I really appreciated that community members sent us some proposals for logo -- I am going to upload on the site.
- Everything else at this point really comes down to communication and
egos.
I have no idea why there's a division between the developers now, but whatever good/bad/no communication happened in the past I hope it can be resolved.
Main points if not obvious..
- Only one rename of OpenSER is going to thrive and gain support. (If I
had to guess)
- In the entire history of open source.. Who has *ever* heard of a core
committer doing something malicious!?! This isn't some draconian corporate environment where your access is cut off before you get your pink slip. Anyway, it's under revision control and backed up. Not that this is any of my business, but I hope it's been corrected already.
Nobody was removed from mailing lists, from board of openser or from developer team. Everybody has commit rights as he/she had before (commit, delete, add, whatever operation in the svn).
There were some changes for root passwords in the servers and removal of administrator privileges. This decision might not be the best one, but considering that openser project was ignored by some developers for about 2 months and the work was done in secrecy to another project could be appreciated as a precaution, plus that the developer stated yesterday that his interest is no longer with this project.
When I started openser I had in mind that developers come, developers go, forks may happen. Even the attack for trademark came as a result of project success. All is at the end just showing the maturity. I have been writing documentation, from the core cookbook to developer guide to make things easier for newcomers and help developers.
Now, from my point of view, I will continue to work on openser/kamailio project and ensure the good quality and community collaboration around. I wish good luck to any new fork starting from kamailio, that shows we are a good and reliable point to start.
What I didn't like in this approach was that openser project was left alone for quite some time while the work (the bugs fixing for the code maintained by the developers doing the fork) was done in secrecy to another project. Would have been fair to announce the retirement once the decision for the new project was taken, so we (the other openser developer) can take over that code and fix the problems in time for release. If you look at the tracker and know the code partitioning between developers you will get the picture. Yes, you can blame me, I was part in a fork as well, but I didn't leave bugs open in my part of the upcoming stable release at that time.
The other developers are taking care now and we will have a stable release on the 7th of August.
All I wish is the developers that trust the openser/kamailio project are let to continue their work and everybody focuses to do the best where they consider to do it. We can make endless declaration s about the future, time will show the results if we work to implement something now.
With kind regards, Daniel Mierla
The bottom line.. I don't know who is more right or wrong in all this and don't care.. If possibly.. can both sides propose some middle ground (ASAP) so everything minus the name can go back to the way it was before...
Most Humbly,
./Christopher
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Nobody was removed from mailing lists, from board of openser or from developer team. Everybody has commit rights as he/she had before (commit, delete, add, whatever operation in the svn).
There were some changes for root passwords in the servers and removal of administrator privileges. This decision might not be the best one, but considering that openser project was ignored by some developers for about 2 months and the work was done in secrecy to another project could be appreciated as a precaution, plus that the developer stated yesterday that his interest is no longer with this project.
Oopse.. ok. I was clearly under the wrong impression on this.. I thought someones commit writes had been revoked.
Your reply is 100% appreciated and for me at least makes things a little more clear.
./C
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu writes:
Also, I'm ready to overlook this "not-nice" action, so granting back my admin rights on the OpenSER project will be an act of respect.
bogdan,
i don't know about the rights removal thing, but it would be interesting for the community to know what your plans regarding OpenSER (now Kamailio) project are.
in my opinion there was lack of respect from your part too when you (as OpenSER project founder) started the new fork without any prior notice to the community or a clear message indicating what you thought was wrong with the project. perhaps we could have together been able to fix the problems and continue without the fork.
-- juha
ps. i'm behind with my email, because i'm in the middle of installing of a new roof for my house. for the same reason i'm not currently able to contribute much to kamailio project.
2008/8/4 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bogdan@voice-system.ro:
Hello everybody,
A new project - OpenSIPs (Open SIP Server) - became active today, with its first release (OpenSIPS 1.4.0).
I'm a bit of confused - OpenSER, Kamailio, OpenSIPs... Could someone, please, summarize differences between OpenSIPs and Kamailio - features/developer teams/project goals/etc.
Hi Peter,
OpenSER (as started by Voice System) goes away due some trademark issues regarding the name (see the web site).
The OpenSER project renamed as Kamailio.
OpenSIPS is a new project started by Voice System as the current OpenSER/Kamailio is not able to provide for us an environment for a quality and progressive work.
Shortly,
/-> Kamailio OpenSER - -> OpenSIPS
Regards, Bogdan
Peter Lemenkov wrote:
2008/8/4 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bogdan@voice-system.ro:
Hello everybody,
A new project - OpenSIPs (Open SIP Server) - became active today, with its first release (OpenSIPS 1.4.0).
I'm a bit of confused - OpenSER, Kamailio, OpenSIPs... Could someone, please, summarize differences between OpenSIPs and Kamailio - features/developer teams/project goals/etc.
OK. I am packaging the OpenSIPs 1.4.0 release for openSUSE as I type, so hopefully it will be ready and on the mirrors by the end of the day.
If and when there is a Kamailio release I will probably package it as well. Given that I am now going to have to maintain 3!! "SERlike" packages, I will probably drop at least one of them as soon as I see which way the wind is blowing..
Due to the trademark issue I have disabled the OpenSER packages from being published and will remove them shortly.
Regards
Peter
On Mon 04 Aug 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Peter,
OpenSER (as started by Voice System) goes away due some trademark issues regarding the name (see the web site).
The OpenSER project renamed as Kamailio.
OpenSIPS is a new project started by Voice System as the current OpenSER/Kamailio is not able to provide for us an environment for a quality and progressive work.
Shortly,
/-> KamailioOpenSER - -> OpenSIPS
Regards, Bogdan
Peter Lemenkov wrote:
2008/8/4 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bogdan@voice-system.ro:
Hello everybody,
A new project - OpenSIPs (Open SIP Server) - became active today, with its first release (OpenSIPS 1.4.0).
I'm a bit of confused - OpenSER, Kamailio, OpenSIPs... Could someone, please, summarize differences between OpenSIPs and Kamailio - features/developer teams/project goals/etc.
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On Monday 04 August 2008, Peter Nixon wrote:
If and when there is a Kamailio release I will probably package it as well. Given that I am now going to have to maintain 3!! "SERlike" packages, I will probably drop at least one of them as soon as I see which way the wind is blowing..
Due to the trademark issue I have disabled the OpenSER packages from being published and will remove them shortly.
Hi Peter,
there will be definitely a Kamailio release in this week. IANAL, but i don't think its necessary to drop the old OpenSER packages, old releases are not affected by this problems.
Cheers,
Henning
Hello,
On 08/04/08 16:59, Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Monday 04 August 2008, Peter Nixon wrote:
If and when there is a Kamailio release I will probably package it as well. Given that I am now going to have to maintain 3!! "SERlike" packages, I will probably drop at least one of them as soon as I see which way the wind is blowing..
Due to the trademark issue I have disabled the OpenSER packages from being published and will remove them shortly.
Hi Peter,
there will be definitely a Kamailio release in this week. IANAL, but i don't think its necessary to drop the old OpenSER packages, old releases are not affected by this problems.
definitely don't remove the old packages, they are not affected by the issues with the trademark. What happens is that we should no longer use openser word for new releases.
There won't be renames to 1.3.x branch and I am thinking in making openser release 1.3.3 available soon, as others expressed this intention, maybe would be latest official release under name openser.
Cheers, Daniel
Cheers,
Henning
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On Mon 04 Aug 2008, Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Monday 04 August 2008, Peter Nixon wrote:
If and when there is a Kamailio release I will probably package it as well. Given that I am now going to have to maintain 3!! "SERlike" packages, I will probably drop at least one of them as soon as I see which way the wind is blowing..
Due to the trademark issue I have disabled the OpenSER packages from being published and will remove them shortly.
Hi Peter,
there will be definitely a Kamailio release in this week. IANAL, but i don't think its necessary to drop the old OpenSER packages, old releases are not affected by this problems.
OK. Well, I have disabled the openser package from being rebuilt or pushed out to the mirrors, however I will leave the existing version on the mirrors until Kamailio is released.
Regards
I am now officially confused. Can someone please give a summary of what is Kamailio and what is OpenSIPS? Are they the same project? Are they 2 different projects?
-Peter
On Mon 04 Aug 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hello everybody,
A new project - OpenSIPs (Open SIP Server) - became active today, with its first release (OpenSIPS 1.4.0).
What is OpenSIPS about?
OpenSER History:
Voice System started the OpenSER project with a vision of running an open project that will deliver a professional software. Along the years Voice System was the main contributor and sustainer of the OpenSER project, organizing conferences, events and tutorials, all aiming to consolidate OpenSER as a top solution for industry VoIP.
OpenSER Issues:
In the past time, several critical problems related to OpenSER project were identified by us:
- the need for a new reliable release - delayed or low-quality releases
are affecting the credibility of the project
- degradation of the project quality - testing, performance measurements
and code quality control are overlooked
- lack of the control, management and coordination of the project -
critical project issues could not be handled or solved
OpenSIPS Solutions:
OpenSIPS is a continuation of the OpenSER project - we have a moral obligation to develop and deliver the high quality and reliable software we envisioned when starting OpenSER.
- a 6 months release cycle, but with no compromise for the technical
issues 2) extensive testing and performance measurements before each major release 3) contributions are guaranteed to be answered and integrated (if accepted) in less than 1 month 4) code review, architecture control and integrated design for software quality 5) technical management with a strict developer hierarchy and developer cooperation to prevent deadlocks or un-availabilities 6) intellectual honesty by having decisions taken on value-based criteria and arguments.
To find more about the project, see the official web page : http://www.opensips.org
OpenSIPS 1.4.0 release:
First major release of OpenSIPS is n**ow available. It incorporates new functionalities like
* dialog profiling extension * local route for internally generated requests * dial plan / translation module * general NAT traversal module (for non-invite signalling) * peering and rate limit (traffic shaping) modules, enhancements like:
* SRV load balancing (based on weights) * nonce re-usage verification (safer authentication)and bug fixing - code, specs and functionality bugs.
The full Changelog is available on the web site:
To get the OpenSIPS 1.4.0 version, see the download page at: http://www.opensips.org/index.php?n=Resources.Downloads
Best regards, Bogdan
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On Monday 04 August 2008, Peter Nixon wrote:
I am now officially confused. Can someone please give a summary of what is Kamailio and what is OpenSIPS? Are they the same project? Are they 2 different projects?
Hi Peter,
i'm also confused. In a nutshell:
Kamailio - renamed OpenSER opensips - fork from OpenSER, created from Bogdan
The project board will come up with an "official" statement later today.
Cheers,
Henning
I thought OpenSER was a fork of SER created by Bogdan...isn't this becoming a tad bit redundant? At the time, I thought forking SER was a terrific idea, as development was taking forever and going nowhere. Since that time there have been many major releases, dozens of new features, and general praise by me. If this fork is based solely on the hideous name "Kamailio", then perhaps you could fork Kamailio into /dev/null and rename the OpenSER project OpenSIPS.
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Monday 04 August 2008, Peter Nixon wrote:
I am now officially confused. Can someone please give a summary of what is Kamailio and what is OpenSIPS? Are they the same project? Are they 2 different projects?
Hi Peter,
i'm also confused. In a nutshell:
Kamailio - renamed OpenSER opensips - fork from OpenSER, created from Bogdan
The project board will come up with an "official" statement later today.
Cheers,
Henning
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Hello,
I have a problem with forwarding...
I create a script wich test the INVITE, if the source ip is in the database... and after, I need to forward it...
For example, I test to call an INVITE from 1000@myopenser to 1000@myopenser for my test ofcourse!-->but it doesn't forward my INVITE to 1000@myopenser!
Have you an idea?
Francois
Hi Francois!
I do not understand what is not working. The IP address verification or the forwarding?
Can you forward without verification? How have you verified that the request is not forward? If you loop the request to the proxy again, you should the request if you sniff on the loopback interface (.e.g ngrep -d lo, or even better: ngrep -d any)
regards klaus
Francois Berganz schrieb:
Hello,
I have a problem with forwarding...
I create a script wich test the INVITE, if the source ip is in the database... and after, I need to forward it...
For example, I test to call an INVITE from 1000@myopenser to 1000@myopenser for my test ofcourse!-->but it doesn't forward my INVITE to 1000@myopenser!
Have you an idea?
Francois
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
The forward dont work! I don't know how to say to openser "ok you can forward it!"
-----Message d'origine----- De : Klaus Darilion [mailto:klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at] Envoyé : lundi 4 août 2008 18:34 À : Francois Berganz Cc : users@lists.kamailio.org Objet : Re: [Kamailio-Users] how to forward my SIP frame ?
Hi Francois!
I do not understand what is not working. The IP address verification or the forwarding?
Can you forward without verification? How have you verified that the request is not forward? If you loop the request to the proxy again, you should the request if you sniff on the loopback interface (.e.g ngrep -d lo, or even better: ngrep -d any)
regards klaus
Francois Berganz schrieb:
Hello,
I have a problem with forwarding...
I create a script wich test the INVITE, if the source ip is in the database... and after, I need to forward it...
For example, I test to call an INVITE from 1000@myopenser to
1000@myopenser
for my test ofcourse!-->but it doesn't forward my INVITE to
1000@myopenser!
Have you an idea?
Francois
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
You should start with the sample configuration
Francois Berganz schrieb:
The forward dont work! I don't know how to say to openser "ok you can forward it!"
-----Message d'origine----- De : Klaus Darilion [mailto:klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at] Envoyé : lundi 4 août 2008 18:34 À : Francois Berganz Cc : users@lists.kamailio.org Objet : Re: [Kamailio-Users] how to forward my SIP frame ?
Hi Francois!
I do not understand what is not working. The IP address verification or the forwarding?
Can you forward without verification? How have you verified that the request is not forward? If you loop the request to the proxy again, you should the request if you sniff on the loopback interface (.e.g ngrep -d lo, or even better: ngrep -d any)
regards klaus
Francois Berganz schrieb:
Hello,
I have a problem with forwarding...
I create a script wich test the INVITE, if the source ip is in the database... and after, I need to forward it...
For example, I test to call an INVITE from 1000@myopenser to
1000@myopenser
for my test ofcourse!-->but it doesn't forward my INVITE to
1000@myopenser!
Have you an idea?
Francois
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On Monday 04 August 2008, Mik Cheez wrote:
If this fork is based solely on the hideous name "Kamailio", then perhaps you could fork Kamailio into /dev/null and rename the OpenSER project OpenSIPS.
Hi Mik,
i accept your position about the name, even if i have another opinion. :-) But we needed to find a new name that is free from third party trademarks, and also not similar to other existing names. And kamailio was choosen in the end from the available suggestions.
Cheers,
Henning
I don't mean to sound overly critical, especially since all the developers and contributors have been so good to the community. What I don't like on the Kamailio side is that I simply can't remember the name; not one I run into in my daily life, and I doubt I'm alone on that. Just last week a group of ex Google engineers released an alternative to Google named "Cuil" (pronounced 'cool'). While that name is also rather hideous, it's memorable. As for OpenSIPS, won't this same exact scenario play out in the near future, where the name has to be free of trademarks? And if it is free of trademarks, why not just use that name?
Just my 2¢
Mik
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Monday 04 August 2008, Mik Cheez wrote:
If this fork is based solely on the hideous name "Kamailio", then perhaps you could fork Kamailio into /dev/null and rename the OpenSER project OpenSIPS.
Hi Mik,
i accept your position about the name, even if i have another opinion. :-) But we needed to find a new name that is free from third party trademarks, and also not similar to other existing names. And kamailio was choosen in the end from the available suggestions.
Cheers,
Henning
I've been holding on OpenSIP.org for many years... perhaps I should be donating it now.
F.
-- Francois D. Menard Project Manager Xittel telecommunications inc. 1350 Royale #800 Trois-Rivieres, QC , G9A 4J4 Canada Follow-me: 819 601 6633 Email: fmenard@xittel.net Fax: 819 374-0395
-----Original Message----- From: users-bounces@lists.kamailio.org [mailto:users- bounces@lists.kamailio.org] On Behalf Of Mik Cheez Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 7:40 PM To: Henning Westerholt Cc: users@lists.kamailio.org Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] OpenSIPS project
I don't mean to sound overly critical, especially since all the developers and contributors have been so good to the community. What I don't like on the Kamailio side is that I simply can't remember the name; not one I run into in my daily life, and I doubt I'm alone on that. Just last week a group of ex Google engineers released an alternative to Google named "Cuil" (pronounced 'cool'). While that name is also rather hideous, it's memorable. As for OpenSIPS, won't this same exact scenario play out in the near future, where the name has to be free of trademarks? And if it is free of trademarks, why not just use that name?
Just my 2¢
Mik
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Monday 04 August 2008, Mik Cheez wrote:
If this fork is based solely on the hideous name "Kamailio", then perhaps you could fork Kamailio into /dev/null and rename the OpenSER project OpenSIPS.
Hi Mik,
i accept your position about the name, even if i have another
opinion. :-) But
we needed to find a new name that is free from third party
trademarks, and
also not similar to other existing names. And kamailio was choosen in
the end
from the available suggestions.
Cheers,
Henning
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Hi Mik,
The name is the least important here :).
As stated, my primer concern is the project itself . I want to keep working and delivering on a project that has all the strength and quality to be used all over the place - and to keep development on going, but with no compromises. Value must be before all.
This is way I moved form SER to OpenSER and further to OpenSIPS - just to keep delivering the project (whatever name it has) envisioned by openser 3 years ago.
Regards, Bogdan
Mik Cheez wrote:
I thought OpenSER was a fork of SER created by Bogdan...isn't this becoming a tad bit redundant? At the time, I thought forking SER was a terrific idea, as development was taking forever and going nowhere. Since that time there have been many major releases, dozens of new features, and general praise by me. If this fork is based solely on the hideous name "Kamailio", then perhaps you could fork Kamailio into /dev/null and rename the OpenSER project OpenSIPS.
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Monday 04 August 2008, Peter Nixon wrote:
I am now officially confused. Can someone please give a summary of what is Kamailio and what is OpenSIPS? Are they the same project? Are they 2 different projects?
Hi Peter,
i'm also confused. In a nutshell:
Kamailio - renamed OpenSER opensips - fork from OpenSER, created from Bogdan
The project board will come up with an "official" statement later today.
Cheers,
Henning
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu writes:
This is way I moved form SER to OpenSER and further to OpenSIPS - just to keep delivering the project (whatever name it has) envisioned by openser 3 years ago.
bogdan,
it would be interesting to know what prevented you from delivering to OpenSER project. the only issue that i'm aware of was the local route stuff that some other developers felt was committed too close to the freeze date.
-- juha
Since some major companies are now, after years of evaluation, testing etc, settling to use OpenSER, I can tell in behalf of them that they are not amused. Please elaborate on the issues you have with the trade mark (if you're allowed to do so).
Andreas
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Monday 04 August 2008, Peter Nixon wrote:
I am now officially confused. Can someone please give a summary of what is Kamailio and what is OpenSIPS? Are they the same project? Are they 2 different projects?
Hi Peter,
i'm also confused. In a nutshell:
Kamailio - renamed OpenSER opensips - fork from OpenSER, created from Bogdan
The project board will come up with an "official" statement later today.
Cheers,
Henning
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On Tuesday 05 August 2008, Andreas Granig wrote:
Since some major companies are now, after years of evaluation, testing etc, settling to use OpenSER, I can tell in behalf of them that they are not amused. Please elaborate on the issues you have with the trade mark (if you're allowed to do so).
Hi Andreas,
we're here are also not amused at all. With regards to the OpenSER TM problem please contact me privately if you like to have further details. Kamailio is at least to my knowledge not affected from trademarks. For details about eventual problems with the name of the fork please also contact me directly, or do some google search by yourself.
Cheers,
Henning
Andreas Granig writes:
Please elaborate on the issues you have with the trade mark (if you're allowed to do so).
anders,
in case no one has answered to this yet, OpenSER project got a few months ago a notice from a company who has registered trademarks on various SER related names and that company asked OpenSER project to stop using OpenSER name. we had no other choice than to comply with the request.
in retrospect, it might have made sense to publish this on OpenSER mailing lists when the request was received.
-- juha
Juha Heinanen wrote:
in case no one has answered to this yet, OpenSER project got a few months ago a notice from a company who has registered trademarks on various SER related names and that company asked OpenSER project to stop using OpenSER name. we had no other choice than to comply with the request.
Is the company that registered the trademark a telecom company? When did they register the trademark? Have they taken other steps to protect their trademark?
Prime example - Delta Airlines and Delta Faucet.
There is only a trademark conflict when the parties cannot agree on how each party uses the trademarked term.
Another example: Apple Computer and The Beatles' record label called Apple - Only when Steve Jobs decided to go the music biz with iTunes was there 'major' problems, even then they still worked things out to keep the brand recognition - which OpenSER has just finally started getting and has now totally lost with this ludicrous name change.
I'm not fond of how Digium changed Zaptel to DAHDI either, but they spent many years fighting it - certainly no knee jerk reaction there.
Also, what inelectual property does "OpenSER" have? As far as I know, "OpenSER" is all freely available and open source, so where is the conflict? With Digium and Zaptel there is very significant IP (and i'm not talking internet addresses :)
in retrospect, it might have made sense to publish this on OpenSER mailing lists when the request was received.
Yes, a public disclosure of the request should have been made - surely somebody has prior art (What about SER? Did they get the same request?)
Jeremy McNamara
P.S. I am not a lawyer, but I should become one :)
The conflict is between OpenSER and SER...your point is very relevant to finding a new name, though, as it's not a case where it has to be completely unique to all industries.
Based on the neat project logo shown earlier, a name like proxywave, or Juevo Proxio would be good names (OK, maybe not the latter one).
Jeremy McNamara wrote:
Juha Heinanen wrote:
in case no one has answered to this yet, OpenSER project got a few months ago a notice from a company who has registered trademarks on various SER related names and that company asked OpenSER project to stop using OpenSER name. we had no other choice than to comply with the request.
Is the company that registered the trademark a telecom company? When did they register the trademark? Have they taken other steps to protect their trademark?
Prime example - Delta Airlines and Delta Faucet.
There is only a trademark conflict when the parties cannot agree on how each party uses the trademarked term.
Another example: Apple Computer and The Beatles' record label called Apple - Only when Steve Jobs decided to go the music biz with iTunes was there 'major' problems, even then they still worked things out to keep the brand recognition - which OpenSER has just finally started getting and has now totally lost with this ludicrous name change.
I'm not fond of how Digium changed Zaptel to DAHDI either, but they spent many years fighting it - certainly no knee jerk reaction there.
Also, what inelectual property does "OpenSER" have? As far as I know, "OpenSER" is all freely available and open source, so where is the conflict? With Digium and Zaptel there is very significant IP (and i'm not talking internet addresses :)
in retrospect, it might have made sense to publish this on OpenSER mailing lists when the request was received.
Yes, a public disclosure of the request should have been made - surely somebody has prior art (What about SER? Did they get the same request?)
Jeremy McNamara
P.S. I am not a lawyer, but I should become one :)
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 14:07 -0700, Mik Cheez wrote:
The conflict is between OpenSER and SER...your point is very relevant to
If you don't know (obviously you don't), please do not spread false information.
P.S. I am not a lawyer, but I should become one :)
Well, I am not sure of that :-)
See at the bottom; self-replying ...
On Sun, 2008-08-10 at 02:54 +0200, Jerome Martin wrote:
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 14:07 -0700, Mik Cheez wrote:
The conflict is between OpenSER and SER...your point is very relevant to
If you don't know (obviously you don't), please do not spread false information.
P.S. I am not a lawyer, but I should become one :)
Well, I am not sure of that :-)
Sorry Jeremy, I accidentally messed up my reading, I thought that was part or the reply to your email :-) If you are on your way to become a lawyer, I wish you the best of luck ! :-)
Jerome Martin wrote:
Sorry Jeremy, I accidentally messed up my reading, I thought that was part or the reply to your email :-) If you are on your way to become a lawyer, I wish you the best of luck ! :-)
It seems to me there needs to be more technically savvy legal minds... Perhaps someday...
Jeremy
You're right...I misunderstood the reasoning and shouldn't have commented.
Jerome Martin wrote:
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 14:07 -0700, Mik Cheez wrote:
The conflict is between OpenSER and SER...your point is very relevant to
If you don't know (obviously you don't), please do not spread false information.
P.S. I am not a lawyer, but I should become one :)
Well, I am not sure of that :-)
Jeremy McNamara schrieb:
Juha Heinanen wrote:
in case no one has answered to this yet, OpenSER project got a few months ago a notice from a company who has registered trademarks on various SER related names and that company asked OpenSER project to stop using OpenSER name. we had no other choice than to comply with the request.
Is the company that registered the trademark a telecom company?
yes
When did they register the trademark?
long time ago, US and Europe
regards klaus
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Jeremy McNamara schrieb:
Is the company that registered the trademark a telecom company?
yes
When did they register the trademark?
long time ago, US and Europe
OK - Where / What is the intellectual property they are claiming that infringes on the trademark?
Jeremy McNamara
Hello Juha,
That would have been nice, yes. I was out for a month and this is what I'm coming-home-to!! what a headache!
cheers
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Juha Heinanen jh@tutpro.com wrote:
Andreas Granig writes:
Please elaborate on the issues you have with the trade mark (if you're allowed to do so).
anders,
in case no one has answered to this yet, OpenSER project got a few months ago a notice from a company who has registered trademarks on various SER related names and that company asked OpenSER project to stop using OpenSER name. we had no other choice than to comply with the request.
in retrospect, it might have made sense to publish this on OpenSER mailing lists when the request was received.
-- juha
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Hi Peter,
(I just copy and paste a previous rely)
OpenSER (as started by Voice System) goes away due some trademark issues regarding the name (see the web site).
The OpenSER project renamed as Kamailio.
OpenSIPS is a new project started by Voice System as the current OpenSER/Kamailio is not able to provide for us an environment for a quality and progressive work.
Shortly,
/-> Kamailio OpenSER - -> OpenSIPS
Regards, Bogdan
Peter Nixon wrote:
I am now officially confused. Can someone please give a summary of what is Kamailio and what is OpenSIPS? Are they the same project? Are they 2 different projects?
-Peter
On Mon 04 Aug 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hello everybody,
A new project - OpenSIPs (Open SIP Server) - became active today, with its first release (OpenSIPS 1.4.0).
What is OpenSIPS about?
OpenSER History:
Voice System started the OpenSER project with a vision of running an open project that will deliver a professional software. Along the years Voice System was the main contributor and sustainer of the OpenSER project, organizing conferences, events and tutorials, all aiming to consolidate OpenSER as a top solution for industry VoIP.
OpenSER Issues:
In the past time, several critical problems related to OpenSER project were identified by us:
- the need for a new reliable release - delayed or low-quality releases
are affecting the credibility of the project
- degradation of the project quality - testing, performance measurements
and code quality control are overlooked
- lack of the control, management and coordination of the project -
critical project issues could not be handled or solved
OpenSIPS Solutions:
OpenSIPS is a continuation of the OpenSER project - we have a moral obligation to develop and deliver the high quality and reliable software we envisioned when starting OpenSER.
- a 6 months release cycle, but with no compromise for the technical
issues 2) extensive testing and performance measurements before each major release 3) contributions are guaranteed to be answered and integrated (if accepted) in less than 1 month 4) code review, architecture control and integrated design for software quality 5) technical management with a strict developer hierarchy and developer cooperation to prevent deadlocks or un-availabilities 6) intellectual honesty by having decisions taken on value-based criteria and arguments.
To find more about the project, see the official web page : http://www.opensips.org
OpenSIPS 1.4.0 release:
First major release of OpenSIPS is n**ow available. It incorporates new functionalities like
* dialog profiling extension * local route for internally generated requests * dial plan / translation module * general NAT traversal module (for non-invite signalling) * peering and rate limit (traffic shaping) modules, enhancements like:
* SRV load balancing (based on weights) * nonce re-usage verification (safer authentication)and bug fixing - code, specs and functionality bugs.
The full Changelog is available on the web site:
To get the OpenSIPS 1.4.0 version, see the download page at: http://www.opensips.org/index.php?n=Resources.Downloads
Best regards, Bogdan
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-
"C. Bergström" -
Andreas Granig -
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
David Villasmil -
Francois Berganz -
Francois Menard -
Henning Westerholt -
Iñaki Baz Castillo -
Jeremy McNamara -
Jerome Martin -
jh＠tutpro.com -
Klaus Darilion -
Mik Cheez -
Peter Lemenkov -
Peter Nixon -
Peter P GMX