[Serusers] why combine ser with asterisk

[Fredrik Lundmark]

PS

...and is designed to provide high capacity (missed that in my earlier 
post).

Has anyone any input on SEMS capacity, except the 
http://ftp.iptel.org/pub/sems/sayer_sems_19.3.07.pdf?

DS

/Fredrik


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fredrik Lundmark" <fredrik at dimi.se>
To: "SIP" <sip at arcdiv.com>; "Nhadie" <nhadie at tbgi.net.ph>
Cc: <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com>; <serusers at lists.iptel.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 2:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Serusers] why combine ser with asterisk


> I'm still learning myself, but SEMS (iptel.org/sems) seems to offer many 
> of
> the media- and/or b2bua-functions that Asterisk do.
>
> ///Fredrik
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "SIP" <sip at arcdiv.com>
> To: "Nhadie" <nhadie at tbgi.net.ph>
> Cc: <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com>; <serusers at lists.iptel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 1:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [Serusers] why combine ser with asterisk
>
>
>> Asterisk is an excellent PBX system, and makes a very good endpoint in
>> the SIP chain for all sorts of things -- IVR systems, voicemail
>> applications, automated messages, etc.
>>
>> It has an extremely well-written CDR engine, so many people mesh it with
>> billing applications to produce accurate accounting information. It also
>> is fully aware of the media stream, which means it's capable of cutting
>> off a call mid-stream, injecting audio into the call, etc, etc.
>>
>> Programming for Asterisk addons can be easily done in just about any
>> language, and it meshes well with the overall structure. Programming for
>> SER is... not so simple.
>>
>> As for running them both on the same box, the biggest problem would be
>> resources. Unlike SER, Asterisk is not designed to be a carrier-grade
>> SIP proxy. If you're actually proxying the media stream, you'd be
>> hard-pressed to squeeze more than 150 simultaneous calls out of Asterisk
>> on even the beefiest of hardware. Add SER to the same box, and you will
>> quickly run into resource problems in medium-sized environments. It also
>> doesn't have a lot of the SIP proxy functionality that SER has.
>>
>> If you're careful, you can configure Asterisk NOT to handle the media
>> stream and still use it for prepaid solutions (using astcc or
>> asterisk-b2bua), and this will save you bandwidth (but you'll still
>> likely run into NAT issues that need to be dealt with somehow) and still
>> let you use Asterisk as an in-between point.
>>
>> Together, Asterisk and SER make a very powerful combination for
>> providing a full suite of services to clientele, and each plays well off
>> the other's strengths.
>>
>> N.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nhadie wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> What's the advantage of combining ser with asterisk? I always see
>>> comments like using ser with asterisk is a very good solution etc. etc.
>>> the thing i liked with ser is that it does not do codec translation,
>>> which saves me cpu usage and also bandwidth. if i combine it with
>>> asterisk, would it not use codec translation?
>>>
>>> i also read that there is also a problem when ser and asterisk is run on
>>> the same machine, why is it so?
>>> if use prepaid billing solution for asterisk like astcc, would i then be
>>> able to provide prepaid service?
>>>
>>> soryy for asking too much, i'd just like to really understand it. Thank
>>> You in advanced.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Nhadie
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Serusers mailing list
>>> Serusers at lists.iptel.org
>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Serusers mailing list
>> Serusers at lists.iptel.org
>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>