Re: [Web-meetme-devel] Web-MeetMe suggestion

[Dan A. <Dan...@Ph...>]

It is not only feasible, it was an early design consideration.  I did
not

actually implement it as we had more than enough connectivity.

=20

I can add it to me my list of desired features, but cannot estimate

a timeline to implement.  I tend to focus on features my users need

or want, with everything else left for when I have spare time.

=20

Dan

=20

From: Jason Craig [mailto:jas...@ro...]=20
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 1:04 PM
To: Dan Austin; ar...@gm...
Subject: Web-MeetMe suggestion

=20

Good afternoon guys,

=20

I first want to say you guys have done a great job on Web-MeetMe!  I've
been testing it for a little while and will probably be rolling it out
to our employees so they can schedule their own conferences and we can
ditch our telco's conferencing and start hosting our own.

=20

I have a suggestion for a future release of Web-MeetMe.  What are the
chances on adding a variable such as inside defines.php where the admin
can define the total maximum number of channels/participants/ports that
can simultaneously be used by all concurrent conferences.

=20

Ie. If a company wants to dedicate a PRI with 23 channels to
conferencing, the maximum number of partipants could only be 23
(assuming they are all external).  When a user was adding a conference,
before it gets added it checks to see if there are other conferences
scheduled at the same time.  If there are it will only add the
conference if the total of the previously scheduled conferences + the
newly added participants is less than the system limit.  If its higher
it will reject the request and possibly tell the user scheduling the
conference there are not enough ports available.

=20

Is this something that's feasible?

=20

=20

Thanks,

=20

Jason

=20