9 Jan
2004
9 Jan
'04
6:08 a.m.
I was going through the source code of SER to implement REGISTER METHOD.
Is there anyone already implementing this functionality?
Kannaiyan
9 Jan
9 Jan
9:10 a.m.
What does that mean ? Do you want ser to be able to send a REGISTER
message to another server ? If so then there is nobody implementing
this.
Jan.
On 09-01 11:08, Kannaiyan Natesan wrote:
I was going through the source code of SER to
implement REGISTER METHOD.
Is there anyone already implementing this functionality?
Kannaiyan
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
2:41 p.m.
Jan Janak wrote:
What does that mean ? Do you want ser to be able to
send a REGISTER
message to another server ? If so then there is nobody implementing
this.
And I can't really understand why a SIP proxy should.
SER is a very good SIP proxy. A proxy sets up calls, doesn't terminate
them. Asterisk is not a SIP proxy, but a good PBX that can originate
and terminate calls, both as a SIP UA Client and a SIP UA Server.
/O
3:20 p.m.
SER is a very good SIP proxy. A proxy sets up calls,
doesn't terminate
No doubt in that.
I really don't want that to be a SIP Proxy feature.
But to add as a module like NAT, RTPProxy. I hope it is clear.
The reason why it is needed:
I cannot buy bulk of phones to have a phone for every sip proxy or even to
pay too much for every additional sip uri. I feel it would be better to be
done at the server side rather than at the sip endpoint.
Asterisk needs a loads of changes to have the same implementation compared
to SER.
Kannaiyan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Olle E. Johansson" <oej(a)edvina.net>
To: "Jan Janak" <jan(a)iptel.org>
Cc: <serusers(a)lists.iptel.org>
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Serusers] REGISTER implementation --
> Jan Janak wrote:
>
> > What does that mean ? Do you want ser to be able to send a REGISTER
> > message to another server ? If so then there is nobody implementing
> > this.
> And I can't really understand why a SIP proxy should.
>
SER is a very good SIP proxy. A proxy sets up calls,
doesn't terminate
> them. Asterisk is not a SIP proxy, but a good PBX that
can originate
> and terminate calls, both as a SIP UA Client and a SIP UA Server.
>
> /O
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
>
3:37 p.m.
On Friday 09 January 2004 21:20, Kannaiyan Natesan wrote:
Thanks :-)
SER is a very
good SIP proxy. A proxy sets up calls, doesn't terminate
No doubt in that. I really don't want that to be a SIP Proxy
feature.
But to add as a module like NAT, RTPProxy. I hope it is clear.
Most of SERs features are implemented as modules, but i guess Ole meant, that
sending REGISTERs is a feature which belongs to endpoints and not to a proxy
which is not able to place or answer calls. And i agree with that.
(For the implemenation of such a feature: hwo to you want to manage all the
passwords, accounts, etc. at the server.. sounds horrible to me.)
The reason why it is needed:
I cannot buy bulk of phones to have a phone for every sip proxy or even to
pay too much for every additional sip uri. I feel it would be better to be
done at the server side rather than at the sip endpoint.
A little analogy: would you tell you SMTP server how it can fetch the mail
from you several mail accounts? I guess not.
Either you use a MAU which can handle several accounts. Or you use
forwardings, to collect all your mails at one central account.
=> Either use SIP clients which can handle several accounts, or forward you
other accounts (by inserting persistent contacts to your central account) to
one central account. (And please dont blame us, if you use accounts at
servers which can not forward your account :-)
Asterisk needs a loads of changes to have the same
implementation compared
to SER.
:-)
Regards
Nils
Kannaiyan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Olle E. Johansson" <oej(a)edvina.net>
To: "Jan Janak" <jan(a)iptel.org>
Cc: <serusers(a)lists.iptel.org>
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Serusers] REGISTER implementation --
Jan Janak wrote:
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers What does that mean ? Do you want ser to be able
to send a REGISTER
message to another server ? If so then there is nobody implementing
this.
And I can't really understand why a SIP proxy should.
SER is a very good SIP proxy. A proxy sets up calls, doesn't terminate
them. Asterisk is not a SIP proxy, but a good PBX that can originate
and terminate calls, both as a SIP UA Client and a SIP UA Server.
/O
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
4:01 p.m.
(For the implemenation of such a feature: hwo to you
want to manage all
the
passwords, accounts, etc. at the server.. sounds
horrible to me.)
I really don't think there is much think to be stored for a
single user.
Username: password: proxy: portno:
Which is not really tough though as by the SER DB modules.
A little analogy: would you tell you SMTP server how
it can fetch the mail
from you several mail accounts? I guess not.
Either you use a MAU which can handle several accounts. Or you use
forwardings, to collect all your mails at one central account.
If my remote
SMTP server is not forwarding the email address, then If
I receive a trigger that a email is received on that account, I can POP and
send it again to my local SMTP server. I think there is an acceptable logic
in this.
With respect to the Registration I think only the "REGISTER" sip
message need to be to send to the register module, rest of the call
sequences we can make to handle by SER. right?
Regards,
Kannaiyan
> Asterisk needs a loads of changes to have the
same implementation
compared
to SER.
:-)
Regards
Nils
Kannaiyan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Olle E. Johansson" <oej(a)edvina.net>
To: "Jan Janak" <jan(a)iptel.org>
Cc: <serusers(a)lists.iptel.org>
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Serusers] REGISTER implementation --
Jan Janak wrote:
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers What does that mean ? Do you want ser to be able
to send a REGISTER
message to another server ? If so then there is nobody implementing
this.
And I can't really understand why a SIP proxy should.
SER is a very good SIP proxy. A proxy sets up calls, doesn't terminate
them. Asterisk is not a SIP proxy, but a good PBX that can originate
and terminate calls, both as a SIP UA Client and a SIP UA Server.
/O
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
4:03 p.m.
Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
Why not start with
Nils' toy SIPSAK and build a client that registers and
then forwards INVITES to your client? A command line function like what
Kannaiyan describes in SIPSAK would be a perfect tool.
Thank you, Nils, for the mail server analogy. There are tons of tools to
fetch mail from several mail accounts and forward to your mail account.
None of them are postfix or sendmail modules.
/O
The reason why it is needed:
I cannot buy bulk of phones to have a phone for every sip proxy or even to
pay too much for every additional sip uri. I feel it would be better to be
done at the server side rather than at the sip endpoint.
4:12 p.m.
On Friday 09 January 2004 22:03, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
Why not start with Nils' toy SIPSAK and build a
client that registers and
then forwards INVITES to your client? A command line function like what
Kannaiyan describes in SIPSAK would be a perfect tool.
Yes, it should be easily possible to extend sipsak to use a given Contact (the
contact address of the "central merging" server) during a registration run.
Then you can run it from a web page, cron job, or whatever to forward your
calls to the given Contact.
Thank you, Nils, for the mail server analogy. There
are tons of tools to
fetch mail from several mail accounts and forward to your mail account.
None of them are postfix or sendmail modules.
That's what i meant: AFAIK there is no mail server available which speaks POP
and/or IMAP (Note: i'm not very familiar with the bulk for the M$ OSs).
Greets
Nils
4:38 p.m.
On Friday 09 January 2004 22:12, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
On Friday 09 January 2004 22:03, Olle E. Johansson
wrote:
Added to the To-Do list (web page and CVS).
Note: i currently do not plan to add a config file option for sipsak to
support multiple accounts. So you would have to call it from a script with
the stored account informations. But i would probably not reject a patch for
a config file :-)
Greets
Nils
Why not start with Nils' toy SIPSAK and build
a client that registers and
then forwards INVITES to your client? A command line function like what
Kannaiyan describes in SIPSAK would be a perfect tool.
Yes, it should be easily possible to extend sipsak to use a given Contact
(the contact address of the "central merging" server) during a registration
run. Then you can run it from a web page, cron job, or whatever to forward
your calls to the given Contact.
6:36 p.m.
Just commited to CVS a new command line option '-C sip:uri' to specify the
Contact value for the REGISTER request.
Greets
Nils
On Friday 09 January 2004 22:38, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
On Friday 09 January 2004 22:12, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
On Friday 09 January 2004 22:03, Olle E.
Johansson wrote:
Added to the To-Do list (web page and CVS).
Note: i currently do not plan to add a config file option for sipsak to
support multiple accounts. So you would have to call it from a script with
the stored account informations. But i would probably not reject a patch
for a config file :-)
Greets
Nils
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers Why not start with Nils' toy SIPSAK and build
a client that registers
and then forwards INVITES to your client? A command line function like
what Kannaiyan describes in SIPSAK would be a perfect tool.
Yes, it should be easily possible to extend sipsak to use a given Contact
(the contact address of the "central merging" server) during a
registration run. Then you can run it from a web page, cron job, or
whatever to forward your calls to the given Contact.
7630
days inactive
7630
days old
9 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Jan Janak -
Kannaiyan Natesan -
Nils Ohlmeier -
Olle E. Johansson