[Serusers] Re: Fw: [Users] TM : retransmission timers
Greger V. Teigre
greger at teigre.com
Fri Nov 10 10:28:21 CET 2006
Rao,
Thanks for keeping this discussion going. I agree that more transparency
is needed, and we are working on that.
Let me help you out with some facts:
- iptel.org is an open-source community open to anybody who wants to
contribute, on development, documentation, or community
- iptel.org is not only focused on SER, but also on SERWeb, SEMS,
rtpproxy, as well as advancing SIP in general (the free SIP service, SIP
information, the product database...)
- Many of the current developers of current SER are employed by what was
formerly known as iptelorg.com, now Tekelec, while many others
(including me) have no affiliation at all with iptelorg.com/Tekelec
- Anyone participating in iptel.org work can get an iptel.org email
address (and anyone using the free SIP service will have an iptel.org
SIP account)
- Commercial iptelorg.com/Tekelec is focused on large-scale SIP server
deployments for telecom companies, both IETF SIP and IMS
- Open-source SER has a life and purpose on its own founded on a handful
of resourceful individuals who, though employed by iptelorg.com/Tekelec,
also spend personal time on the project due to their interest in SIP
(and would do so even if they changed jobs)
- The features developed by SER developers at iptelorg.com/Tekelec are
partly influenced by what they do in their day job and partly what they
feel is important to SER as an open-source SIP server
- Other developers/contributors are influenced by *their*
projects/dayjobs/visions for SER
- Anybody can contribute ideas and try to get a "sponsor" (developer)
for that functionality on serdev (or contribute code themselves)
- The iptel.org website, the SER - Getting Started document and much
other documentation is focused on the advancement of SIP, and we don't
really worry too much about whether people use ser or openser (in fact,
an effort to write an openser Getting Started document is in progress,
and we'll try to coordinate as much as possible on what is common)
- SER is an open-source project that has much to improve when it comes
to documentation and transparency in processes, but we are making good
progress
- SER open-source project is about quality, reliability and large-scale
setups with longer turn-around time on new releases and longer support
for older versions than what is normal for open-source projects.
However, we have discussed introducing a new development track making
new features more easily accessible for those who want "bleeding edge"
- Documentation improvements for SER will be in areas important for SIP
professionals, including release predictability, migration
documentation, scripting, quality improvements in best practices for
ser.cfg etc
- SER's development will not be better than the people contributing and
everybody can make an effort
I don't want to say anything bad about OpenSER. Most "old-timers" on
serusers know that I didn't like the fork, I think it would have been
possible to do things within (a better governed) shared open-source
project, but the community was never allowed to say its meaning and
personal differences probably made it impossible.
OpenSER have done good things and some good people contribute code to
the project.
As for VON, I'm not sure if Tekelec was there, probably not, but the
absence of a booth for iptel.org is more due to the fact that iptel.org
is a loose collection of individuals with sponsorship from FOKUS
Fraunhofer and iptelorg.com/Tekelec and not an entity that has resources
(or inclinations) to do commercial efforts.
g-)
Rao Ramaratnamma wrote:
> Hi Weiter,
>
> Yeah, I have been trying to limit myself to technical observations
> too, but the governance aspect is somewhat interesting too as a hint
> for future development, even though I guess even this is much more
> confusing than the technical ones. I have investigated, both projects
> have their firms with them that pursue their commercial interests
> which creates a risk of possibly departing from the public interest,
> like with redhat. From this angle they look quite similar. But if any
> worries me just a little bit more than openser. Appearance at
> commercial shows on the "open" side versus technical event on the
> "net" side if I take your BSD parallel, marketing "open" webpage
> accusing "net" version bad, hiding root commerical sponsors on the
> "open" webpage, this could be signs for a redhat-like doubleedged
> sword. Hopefully I am oversensing because I mean it is natural that
> everybody has SOME interest, but indisputably folks on both sides have
> done good work, but same indisputably more TRANSPARENCY would be
> helpful for both projects so that users can be less investigative.
>
> But I agree the technical comparison you suggest will be very useful
> if not most useful. This is what I am eventually upto. Anything folks
> have to tell in this topic is most welcome like the retransmission
> timers in subject or user loading.
>
> rr
>
> disconcerted by the fact that the more I know the more I am confused
> and determined to get over the learning curve quickly. also excuse the
> abuse I crossposted again but I think cross interrogation is a bit
> painful but the more effective :-)
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Weiter Leiter <bp4mls at googlemail.com>
> To: Kim Il <kim_il_s at yahoo.com>
> Cc: users at openser.org
> Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2006 1:42:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: [Users] TM : retransmission timers
>
> Common user barely has time to meet his boss requirements, rather than
> playing around with different scenarios, platforms, environments.
>
> I only read one email where Daniel stated that OpenSER now performs a
> whole much better while loading users from database. SER guys put no
> figure out yet, neither bare numbers nor comparisons. I'm just really
> curious to see how both servers perform, that's all.
>
> Even though I must maintain my SER, I kinda like OpenSER's faster
> releases and developers' responsiveness (that I shamelessly exploit
> for the common code left there :-), which is pretty much nonexistent
> with iptel (at least this is the general belief here at OpenSER). But
> about this I'll probably have to fight on SER's mailing list. I still
> wish that one day I won't have to compare features; heck, NetSER and
> FreeSER are still available ;-).
>
> WL.
>
> PS. Maybe regretfully, I haven't seen any iptel booth at von this
> year, while OpenSER guys put up a nice show. My congrats.
>
> On 11/9/06, *Kim Il* <kim_il_s at yahoo.com <mailto:kim_il_s at yahoo.com>>
> wrote:
>
> I can see what you are hinting at, but I guess that the users are
> the unbiased party that should do the judgment and not the parties
> who have something to gain.
>
> cheers
>
>
> */Weiter Leiter <bp4mls at googlemail.com
> <mailto:bp4mls at googlemail.com>>/* wrote:
>
> This features comparisons are not to last for too long, some
> performance comparisons would also be nice. After all, there
> are plenty of UA-level stacks out there. At least now that
> both projects get to have stable releases after forking and
> some core functionality remained shared.
>
> I wonder what "unbiased" organization will take up the
> challenge. :-)
>
> On 11/8/06, *Kim Il* < kim_il_s at yahoo.com
> <mailto:kim_il_s at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> this is a really good start and we should collect these
> things so as to help the community to take the right
> choice. I would also suggest that what ever ground
> breaking issues we list we stay at the functional level (I
> do not think anyone is helped by using a description
> containing "allowing carrier grade platforms" and similar
> marketing phrases).
>
> cheers
>
>
> {truncated because too large}
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sponsored Link
>
> Talk more and pay less. Vonage can save you up to $300 a year on
> your phone bill. Sign up now.
> <http://clk.atdmt.com/VON/go/yhxxxvon1080000017von/direct/01/>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20061110/7e736657/attachment.htm>
More information about the sr-users
mailing list