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.
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:
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@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
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:
Well, trying to be a bit objective:
- It depends on your needs
- 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:
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@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
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:
Well, trying to be a bit objective:
- It depends on your needs
- 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:
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@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
-- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
I will add few remarks related to project's policy and evolution.
OpenSER is driven by a board with members from different companies which will ensure project's independence and survival when one company changes its interest in the public project. Also, the project has a clear roadmap, major changes being discussed on development mailing list. People leading the project are two of the five core developers of SER and four main contributors of SER.
The release policy is guided by changes and it is about one major release every 6-8 months. This type of releasing allow easy migration from older version to new one, otherwise the administrators will have nightmares to update to totally new configuration and database structure - small steps guarantee better results when dealing with production environments.
The contributions are accepted if they follow a recognized standard from IETF/ITU/ETSI or other standardization groups, or is general interesting feature. No company can stop it for private interest.
In this way we are able to implement geographic distributed VoIP platforms with the latest OpenSER, have a significant number of database types supported as backend via the unixodbc module in the stable version, these and may others only from third party contributions. Other important scalability features added in about one year of OpenSER: number of location entries which can be managed by OpenSER compiled with default flags grew from about 4000 entries as it was when it forked from SER to about 120 000, and now this number scales linear with available memory (for 120000 online users, OpenSER uses about 40MB memory, while the old architecture required about 256MB). I am sure you can find more on project's web site ...
Cheers, Daniel
On 07/16/06 13:06, Greger V. Teigre wrote:
Well, trying to be a bit objective:
- It depends on your needs
- 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:
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@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
At 11:40 19/07/2006, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
I will add few remarks related to project's policy and evolution.
OpenSER is driven by a board with members from different companies which will ensure project's independence and survival when one company changes its interest in the public project.
As this is going to the ser mailing list, I would like to take the freedom to present a quite different approach which has shown very viable in SER history. That is, SER has been developed by consistent team of long-term key developers spending their full-time job on SER's evolution. They have been able to steer SER's direction since its inception till today in moderately growing capacity. Despite the logo of the employer has changed over the time, all key members remained on board, provided continuity and took care to integrate third-party contributions in the software suite in a consistent manner. Employer's interest has been playing role in that it has been providing strong field feedback from customer but that's, to be clear, a feature.
Even if "openser" claims to be different, solely by the fact of taking vast amounts of SER code, it basically acknowledges the SER results which have been generated the way they have been generated.
Also, I'm glad the point of 'incremental easy-to-execute updates' was raised. Clearly, I consider a revised data model in SER a superior change which was overdue and which has greatly improved applicability of the software. The price for it is devising good migration procedures but that appears to me a kind of one-time pain, as opposed to the pain-level associated with living with an outdated data model. The other downside of such fundmanetal changes is longer release cycle but that still appears very acceptable trade-off to me.
-jiri
-- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
-
Chahn John Kim -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Greger V. Teigre -
Jiri Kuthan