22 Jul
2007
22 Jul
'07
4:58 p.m.
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and end-
point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy
2.0, now is a good moment to describe it.
Regards,
Adrian
22 Jul
22 Jul
5:31 p.m.
Hi!
On 7/22/07, Adrian Georgescu <ag(a)ag-projects.com> wrote:
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and end-
point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy
2.0, now is a good moment to describe it.
Support for a bridge mode network configuration - like rtpproxy.
--
Morten Isaksen
http://www.misak.dk/blog/
5:34 p.m.
t.38 passthrough.
regards
Rosario
----- Original Message -----
From: "Morten Isaksen" <misak(a)misak.dk>
To: "Adrian Georgescu" <ag(a)ag-projects.com>om>; <users(a)openser.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2007 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] MediaProxy 2.0 roadmap
Hi!
On 7/22/07, Adrian Georgescu <ag(a)ag-projects.com> wrote:
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and end-
point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy
2.0, now is a good moment to describe it.
Support for a bridge mode network configuration - like rtpproxy.
--
Morten Isaksen
http://www.misak.dk/blog/
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
8:11 p.m.
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and
end-point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy 2.0,
now is a good moment to describe it.
Working MySQL accounting that DOES NOT require RADIUS.
Jeremy McNamara
30 Jul
30 Jul
4:37 p.m.
On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 19:11:04 +0200, Jeremy McNamara <jj(a)nufone.net> wrote:
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
Hi,
As I was hoping to use the current version of Mediaproxy with Openser and
do accounting in Mysql, I was alarmed by your request.
Do you mean the current Mediaproxy does not work with Mysql at all, or
that there are issues?
I couldn't immediately find any bug reports when seraching for 'Mediaproxy
MySQL accounting'.
Could you highlight the issues to expect when using Mediaproxy to do
accounting without Radius please?
Thanks,
Richard
If you would like to see new functionality
included in MediaProxy 2.0,
now is a good moment to describe it.
Working MySQL accounting that DOES NOT require RADIUS.
22 Jul
22 Jul
8:13 p.m.
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and
end-point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy 2.0,
now is a good moment to describe it.
Written in C would be preferred as well.
Jeremy McNamara
23 Jul
23 Jul
11:20 a.m.
Hi Adrian,
what about possibility of copying as per request each channel RTP (to
be used further when call recording is needed).
Cheers,
DanB
On 7/22/07, Jeremy McNamara <jj(a)nufone.net> wrote:
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
> rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and
> end-point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
> functionality.
>
> If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy 2.0,
> now is a good moment to describe it.
12:15 p.m.
I'd also like to have this "forked" RTP feature so we can redirect a copy
of
the stream to another location.
Sam.
2007/7/23, Dan-Cristian Bogos <dan.bogos(a)gmail.com>om>:
Hi Adrian,
what about possibility of copying as per request each channel RTP (to
be used further when call recording is needed).
Cheers,
DanB
On 7/22/07, Jeremy McNamara <jj(a)nufone.net> wrote:
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
> rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and
> end-point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
> functionality.
>
> If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy 2.0,
> now is a good moment to describe it.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
12:58 p.m.
Hi Adrian
I'd like a feature which allow OpenSER to force the call to be proxied
via a different set of servers.
This would help with multi site installation where control of which set
of proxy used would be helpful.
I'd also like to see away of having calling be routed thought multiply
proxies.
This would help where routed link between sites might not be the best
way of sending traffic.
Hope I'm making sense :)
I have no problem with media proxy being written in python but I would
suggest that some profiling of the code and rewriting some of the
modules or functions in C would help.
Mike
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and
end-point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy 2.0,
now is a good moment to describe it.
Regards,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
24 Jul
24 Jul
3:40 p.m.
Hi everybody,
This is the same idea I want to propose, a way to put a specific call into a
specific group of media proxies. Maybe this change is more like a
modification to the MEDIAPROXY Module; if OpenSER would have a way to say to
the dispatcher what criteria use to select media proxies, rather than using
a static configuration, I think that would be enough. The next step would be
which tools use to decide from OpenSER what set of media proxies use based
on the best or nearer way to reach the users, but Is that something possible
to do through Dynamic Load-Balancing DNS dlbDNS?
Regards,
Dioris
-----Mensaje original-----
De: users-bounces(a)openser.org [mailto:users-bounces@openser.org] En nombre
de Mike O'Connor
Enviado el: 23 de Julio de 2007 4:58 a.m.
Para: Adrian Georgescu; devel(a)openser.org; users(a)openser.org
Asunto: Re: [OpenSER-Users] MediaProxy 2.0 roadmap
Hi Adrian
I'd like a feature which allow OpenSER to force the call to be proxied
via a different set of servers.
This would help with multi site installation where control of which set
of proxy used would be helpful.
I'd also like to see away of having calling be routed thought multiply
proxies.
This would help where routed link between sites might not be the best
way of sending traffic.
Hope I'm making sense :)
I have no problem with media proxy being written in python but I would
suggest that some profiling of the code and rewriting some of the
modules or functions in C would help.
Mike
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and
end-point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy 2.0,
now is a good moment to describe it.
Regards,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
3:40 p.m.
Hi everybody,
This is the same idea I want to propose, a way to put a specific call into a
specific group of media proxies. Maybe this change is more like a
modification to the MEDIAPROXY Module; if OpenSER would have a way to say to
the dispatcher what criteria use to select media proxies, rather than using
a static configuration, I think that would be enough. The next step would be
which tools use to decide from OpenSER what set of media proxies use based
on the best or nearer way to reach the users, but Is that something possible
to do through Dynamic Load-Balancing DNS dlbDNS?
Regards,
Dioris
-----Mensaje original-----
De: users-bounces(a)openser.org [mailto:users-bounces@openser.org] En nombre
de Mike O'Connor
Enviado el: 23 de Julio de 2007 4:58 a.m.
Para: Adrian Georgescu; devel(a)openser.org; users(a)openser.org
Asunto: Re: [OpenSER-Users] MediaProxy 2.0 roadmap
Hi Adrian
I'd like a feature which allow OpenSER to force the call to be proxied
via a different set of servers.
This would help with multi site installation where control of which set
of proxy used would be helpful.
I'd also like to see away of having calling be routed thought multiply
proxies.
This would help where routed link between sites might not be the best
way of sending traffic.
Hope I'm making sense :)
I have no problem with media proxy being written in python but I would
suggest that some profiling of the code and rewriting some of the
modules or functions in C would help.
Mike
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and
end-point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy 2.0,
now is a good moment to describe it.
Regards,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
23 Jul
23 Jul
5:59 p.m.
How about some time-out funtionality? So that out-time calls could be
disconnected, or forwarded (to a URA, p.ex.) after a predefined time or
after receiving a Radius PoD packet?? All to accommodate better Pre-Pay
systems.
Edson
-----Original Message-----
From: users-bounces(a)openser.org [mailto:users-bounces@openser.org] On
Behalf Of Adrian Georgescu
Sent: domingo, 22 de julho de 2007 10:59
To: users openser.org; devel(a)openser.org
Cc: AG Support
Subject: [OpenSER-Users] MediaProxy 2.0 roadmap
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and end-
point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy
2.0, now is a good moment to describe it.
Regards,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
10:38 p.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] Re: [OpenSER-Devel] MediaProxy 2.0 roadmap
I think it would be very useful to have some level of bi-directional
integration with OpenSER such that an active dialog can be terminated
by/in the mediaproxy and that termination would be communicated to
OpenSER so that the appropriate SIP messages could be sent out
This could facilitate:
- Dead/Open session detection
- Pre-Paid billing environments (length restrictions on the call)
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and
end-point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy 2.0,
now is a good moment to describe it.
Regards,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
24 Jul
24 Jul
12:46 a.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] Re: [OpenSER-Devel] MediaProxy 2.0 roadmap
Hi Adrian,
-Call Recording
-Music on Hold
Bayan Towfiq
On Jul 24, 2007, at 3:38 AM, Tavis P. wrote:
I think it would be very useful to have some level of
bi-directional
integration with OpenSER such that an active dialog can be terminated
by/in the mediaproxy and that termination would be communicated to
OpenSER so that the appropriate SIP messages could be sent out
This could facilitate:
- Dead/Open session detection
- Pre-Paid billing environments (length restrictions on the call)
Adrian Georgescu wrote:
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and
end-point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy
2.0,
now is a good moment to describe it.
Regards,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel 
9:10 a.m.
New subject: [OpenSER-Users] Re: [OpenSER-Devel] MediaProxy 2.0 roadmap
Hi Adrian
I have read some time back rtpproxy handle more calls than MediaProxy
is this addressing in new version of MediaProxy 2.X
ram
23 Aug
23 Aug
10:07 a.m.
Hi!
Regarding earlier discussions regarding Python's support (or lack of?) for
SMP processors - can you give some reflection on this matter
- Is this an issue or just a misunderstanding and/or an old problem with
earlier versions?
- Should one use single core processors for the python applications/modules?
- Is it dependent on the Linux distribution, some works better, some not?
BR///
Fredrik
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Georgescu" <ag(a)ag-projects.com>
To: "users openser.org" <users(a)openser.org>rg>; <devel(a)openser.org>
Cc: "AG Support" <support(a)ag-projects.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2007 3:58 PM
Subject: [OpenSER-Users] MediaProxy 2.0 roadmap
Hello,
I am capturing requirements for MediaProxy 2.0. This is a complete
rewrite based on a new design that allows for better security and end-
point mobility, higher scalability on a per node basis and new
functionality.
If you would like to see new functionality included in MediaProxy 2.0,
now is a good moment to describe it.
Regards,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
6301
days inactive
6333
days old
15 comments
14 participants
participants (14)
-
Adrian Georgescu -
Bayan Towfiq -
Dan-Cristian Bogos -
Dioris Moreno -
Edson -
Fredrik Lundmark -
Jeremy McNamara -
Mike O'Connor -
Morten Isaksen -
ram -
Richard Bennett -
Rosario Pingaro -
samuel -
Tavis P.