Re: [OpenSBC] [OpenSIPStack] Two (2) OSBC on net segment

[<sa...@ER...>]

Hi ehernaez

In a conference call today my  boss was in a rare mood.  Which got us
thinking about this "Open Source"  effort.   We have gone in circles and
doubled back more then once.    There seems to be fog and every once in
while a fist punches through and drops some gold from it's hand and then
retreats.  Clearly you know exactly how to set this up and test it.  What is
the delay in publishing a simple how to like the SIP TRUNK doc.  Its a great
starter doc but un-worth of the talent running around Solegy.com.  It may
come in handy someday when SIP TRUNK actually starts working.

How would you like to create a How To for all us imbeciles.  After all isn't
that the basic theosophy surrounding Open Source?

If we were to get this to work and wanted to publish a step by step How To
and wanted to make it available to everyone on this list how would we go
about doing it so that it would be not burred 10 levels down.?

Warren Kreckler


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ehernaez" <ope...@op...>
To: <ope...@li...>
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [OpenSBC] [OpenSIPStack] Two (2) OSBC on net segment
>
>
> It's definitely not necessary to have 4 OSBC instances.  The same OSBC
instances can be used for inbound and outbound call scenarios.  You just
need to be able to distinguish between inbound and outbound calls, which can
be done by using a SIPX prefix for outbound calls.
>
> 8&lt;----------------------------- 
>
>
> Hi ehernaez
>
> ITSP &lt;==&gt; Peering OSBC &lt;==&gt; Access OSBC &lt;==&gt; sipX  This
requires two (2)
> opensbc's
> UA &lt;==&gt; Access OSBC &lt;==&gt; sipX &lt;==&gt; Peering OSBC
&lt;==&gt; ITSP.  This requires
> two (2) additional OSBC
>
> For a grand total of four (4) OSBC's.  That's 5 servers altogether.
>
> Another way of looking at this is using factoring:
>
> ITSP &lt;==&gt; Peering OSBC &lt;==&gt; Access OSBC &lt;==&gt; sipX
>
> II
>
> II
> UA &lt;==&gt; Access OSBC &lt;==&gt; sipX &lt;==&gt;
> Peering OSBC &lt;==&gt; ITSP
>
> or this
>
> ITSP &lt;==&gt; Peering OSBC &lt;==&gt; Access OSBC &lt;==&gt; sipX
&lt;==&gt; UA &lt;==&gt; Access OSBC
> &lt;==&gt; sipX &lt;==&gt; Peering OSBC &lt;==&gt; ITSP
>
> This is beginning to make me laugh out loud.  In other words there is no
way
> of using UPPerRegistration and Relay routes to eliminate 2 of the OSBC's
>
> It's beginning to look like the sipX people should incorporate openSBC as
a
> SIP TRUNK Gateway for both Peering and Access Edge SBC's.  After all
openSBC
> is 100% RFC compliant.  My god 4 OSBC's servers...
>
> Warrem Kreckler.
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Opensipstack-osbcdevel mailing list
> Ope...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensipstack-osbcdevel
>