[Serdev] SER's core design features(process model/parser/lumps/script) - was: So who/what is SER for, anyway?

[Greger V. Teigre]

Dragos Vingarzan wrote:
> Jan Janak wrote:
>   
>> Klaus Darilion wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> ...
>>> rtp_proxy=mediaproxy/rtpproxy
>>>
>>> allow_preloaded_routesets=no/yes
>>>
>>> And so on. 
>>>     
>>>       
>>   But this is how, for example, asterisk works. I have seen a couple of
>>   setups where the default behavior of nat traversal as you described it
>>   was not sufficient and I had to do custom changes -- being grateful
>>   for the flexibility we have.
>>
>>   
>>     
> OK, but what if when you discover a strange behavior you put it in and
> then have a flag, like "fix_the_stupid_X_nat". This flag being
> documented, would then save a lot of time for a lot of administrators
> that would bang their heads on the same X NAT. 
That's true and we need more sharing of "trade secrets" and "proprietary 
solutions." Why? Because if everybody spends time on solving these 
things, they don't have time and resources on the really innovative 
stuff and the commercial HPs, Ericsson and Oracles of this world beat 
the hell out of open-source. That's the real threat to open source, not 
the telcos scepticism. Even non-telcos go for commercial solutions 
because open-source has too much nitty-gritty stuff they don't want to 
spend time and competence on.
    So, challenge: Get your trade secrets into the open, so we all can 
get a decent SIP network running, so we can start innovating and compete 
with the commercial world.
g-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serdev/attachments/20070129/4205ac1b/attachment.html