[sr-dev] [Kamailio-Users] kamailio 3.0 - the time before freezing

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello,

On 24.08.2009 14:14 Uhr, Alex Balashov wrote:
> The sip-router.org documentation is already excessively complicated 
> and difficult to understand for anyone who does not routinely work 
> with both the K and S code.  At this point, the documentation, while 
> voluminous, is overwhelming and, in places, woefully incomplete,
can you point such places?

> while in other places, I would say "exhaustively" (perhaps 
> "exhaustingly") complete.

 From K point of view, same documentation is available, the core, pv and 
transformations cookbooks are updated completely -- actually only core 
cookbook needed a major update since we had a lot of new parameters for 
dns, transport layers, etc...


>
> All of this confusion - starting with the fundamental difference 
> between K and SR, which nobody *I* know in the user community yet 
> understands in any level of substance or detail

Kamailio is the same -- will be a new major release of the sip server 
everybody know so far -- new features in core plus some new modules, 
either new development (memcache) or imported from ser (iptrtproxy). To 
update from kamailio 1.5 to 3.0 you will need, as usual, some db 
structure updates (not much afaik - lcr module, maybe cr) and some 
updates to config file syntax (minimal as well for most of usage cases).

Your questions can be rephrased as "what is the difference between linux 
and debian?". Debian is just a particular packaging of available linux 
applications. In similar way, Kamailio, is SR core plus selection of SR 
modules. Like in linux, where are application that overlap in 
functionality, and one is preferred over the others (e.g., MTA), in SR 
there are modules that overlap (e.g., auth) using a different 
concept/database structure and one is preferred to the other.
> I also encounter the widespread perception from my customers that a 
> lot of time has been spent on "fun"
I would have liked some fun, but there wasn't, not for me, very 
interesting perception I would say, maybe you can point me such cases. 
It was quite heavy work. The goal of trying to preserve max 
compatibility while not messing up a lot of code in core was achieved - 
the core impact was kept minimal, therefore inheriting stability from 
ser 2.0. Several modules took the load of extra features.


> and "interesting" integration work, not on developing features or 
> fixing bugs.  I hope they're wrong.
What are the bugs staying unfixed? What are missing features not 
adopted? There was quite a lot of new development, including transport 
layer such as sctp, asyncronous message processing (t_suspend/t_continue 
which is functional), continuing with new modules (link provided in 
previous email).

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
* http://www.asipto.com/