[Serusers] SIP Express Bundle. Step 1.

SIP sip at arcdiv.com
Thu Feb 28 19:47:15 CET 2008


While I'm all for being distro-agnostic, as we're looking to build an 
ISO that you boot from and that installs all the necessary stuff to get 
up and running, we have to pick one -- hence the choice. This way, we 
can ensure that the base system built is guaranteed to have all the 
pre-requisites, the libraries we KNOW will function without issue, the 
settings which make sense for a SER system, etc.

Building an installable package on a random system can run you into 
every sysadmin's least favourite pasttime -- hunting down the numerous 
pre-requisites, installing them, and working through the conflicts.

I'm all for a script that activates the build-system on 
bootstrap/post-install so it can build an oob cfg for the box in 
question. I just wanted to point out that that's one of the things 
needing doing. :)

N.


Greger Viken Teigre wrote:
> I would just suggest that you try to stay as distro-independent as 
> possible, i.e. make it easy to switch to another distro and make it 
> easy for people to bootstrap on another distro by looking at the 
> dependencies (and maybe contribute their bootstrap script :-).
>
> As for config file, the ser-oob.cfg and ser.cfg that is generated by 
> the buildsystem (sip_router/etc/buildsystem) are quite close. The 
> buildsystem has a configure script that can be run as part of the 
> bootstrap (it creates an m4 config file for local) or a web-based 
> front-end can generate the config file quite easily.
> As I'm the maintainer of the buildsystem, I can promise some support 
> if the system needs some adaption or the config file needs updating.  
> I cannot speak for ser-oob.cfg, but as the idea is to show-case the 
> iptel.org free SIP service config, I assume it will be more static.
>
> See config buildsystem docs: 
> http://www.iptel.org/sip_express_router_configuration_buildsystem
>
> I'll follow the discussions and contribute where and when I can.
> g-)
>
> SIP wrote:
>> If no one else is going to come forward and second/debate Mike's 
>> suggestion to use FC, and Mike's the man with the server, then I declare 
>> this project officially FC-based.
>>
>> These are the people that have so far contacted me and are verified for 
>> working on the SER Bundle Project, and for what tasks I have them available:
>>
>> Jai Rangi  -- kickstart work in FC
>> Arun Kumar  -- flexible
>> Samuel  -- some time/flexible
>> ram  -- testing
>> Mike Trest  -- server, testing, FC wrangling
>>
>> Tasks we still need to fill (some of which can be filled perhaps by the 
>> people listed above as flexible or others in the project):
>>
>> Core:
>> -SERWeb install/config
>> -RTP Proxy install/config (for base RTP proxy package -- not strictly 
>> SER config)
>> -SEMS w/voicemail, away announcement, and conferencing support 
>> install/config
>>
>> Tools:
>> All tools (ser_ctl, sipsak, tcpdump/ngrep, wireshark/tshark, sipp, 
>> sip_scenario, spyagent+sipspy
>>
>> Also, with no install package for SER with a basic config, SER itself 
>> will have to be installed/scripted to install with a tailored 
>> config(ser-oob.cfg) for the correct system/parameters. I'm ASSUMING that 
>> will go into the basic core install scripts, so I didn't add it in up 
>> there, but if this is an invalid assumption, someone has to let me know
>>
>>
>> As you can see, if you're interested in being a part of this project and 
>> can contribute time to getting it going, there are plenty of areas left 
>> where we need people to help. Just let me know, and I'll add you to the 
>> list.
>>
>>
>>
>> N.
>>
>>
>> Neil Fusillo wrote:
>>   
>>> As long as the environment can be built to be stable, I'm in complete 
>>> agreement. While our initial adopters may be the tinkerers and the 
>>> risk-takers, I'd say that a good number of those people already try out 
>>> SER (and may ultimately choose something with less of a learning 
>>> curve).  The biggest market for a SER bundle in the long run is going to 
>>> be those who want to get a carrier grade SIP proxy up and running 
>>> quickly and easily. Who that might be is somewhat difficult to 
>>> determine, but I dare say we don't want to position ourselves as 
>>> building a bundle for those who're willing to take risks. ;)
>>>
>>> That said, the decision for CentOS came about because it is simply a 
>>> GPL-compliant duplicate distro of Red Hat Enterprise Linux -- the single 
>>> most common and most popular distribution amongst people who run linux 
>>> in a carrier-grade situation.
>>>
>>> Fedora Core, being the test bed for RHEL, has the same structure but 
>>> newer, slightly less-vetted packages. However, if we can ensure 
>>> stability, then none of that matters and no one will really care what 
>>> distro it's built upon (as long as it's familiar to the admins who 
>>> manage it). If you say you can build a stable FC-based SER server, then 
>>> I say we go for it.
>>>
>>> Do we have a second to Mike's motion to use FC as the base distro?
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike Trest - Personal wrote:
>>>   
>>>     
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This is to summarize my opinions about FC* distro use.
>>>>
>>>> IMHO, I think FC* is best selection as it contains many more fixes 
>>>> than does the older CENTOS (based on 5).   I have deployed several 
>>>> hundred FC* boxes in VoIP applications.  This is over 10,000 active 
>>>> ports without "Enterprise" stability issues.
>>>>
>>>> IMHO this project needs the quickest path to the Enterprise community 
>>>> regardless of the OS/distro used.
>>>>
>>>> I suppose the ultimate question is who is our target?  Ourselves, 
>>>> naturally.  However,   I suggest our target is not the bankers or 
>>>> major corporations with lots of rules and procedures.  That group 
>>>> will never adopt SER until they have a commercial-grade support 
>>>> system to advise their IT folks what to do for every question they may have.
>>>>
>>>> IMHO our initial target is those early adopters who are trying to 
>>>> create new businesses in telecomm or consulting-on-telecom.   We want 
>>>> them to have a solid core that they can leverage into their new 
>>>> appliances and specialized applications.
>>>>
>>>> The early adopters are risk-takers  (This means us as well!)  They 
>>>> demand an open box in which they can face the SIP world with some 
>>>> assurance of standards compliance while at the same time they can 
>>>> face their clients with something better, faster, cheaper, and 
>>>> innovative enough to get paid well for their efforts.
>>>>
>>>> Making a technology "buy - in" decision at any point in time is only 
>>>> a check point -  not a final resting place.  IMHO, we are better off 
>>>> selecting an OS/distro effort that has a large share of both early 
>>>> adopters and long term commercial support - - - so long as it meets 
>>>> our current and future technical **AND** target market 
>>>> requirements.   Research confirms that the RH/FC community is the 
>>>> largest community with name recognition and respect among both the 
>>>> "geek-innovator" community as well as the Enterprise community.
>>>>
>>>> ..mike..
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
>>
>>   




More information about the sr-users mailing list