[Asterisk-Dev] asterisk 'stable'?

[Brian West]

I can agree with all of that ;)

/b


On 9/13/05 7:11 PM, "Greg Boehnlein" <damin at nacs.net> wrote:

> My opinion is that Asterisk, as it was originally designed, I.E. as a
> low-volume PBX replacement has done a fantastically stellar job of
> overchieving. Where it seems to be failing is where people are pushing it
> beyond the original intentions. Most asterisk implementations that I hear
> about are successful and stable. Granted most of those do not exceed 96
> channels on a PRI card, but for pete's sake.. if you want a
> true Softswitch, go buy a Sonus.
> 
> Asterisk is a VERY stable PBX replacement and low volume Gateway /
> Application server. When you start to scale it much beyond that, you are
> exceeding it's original design implications. As such, you are most likely
> going to encounter situations that were never even dreamed of when the
> code was birthed. That is what people are starting to do now, and we're
> seeing where Asterisk falls over. This a natural part of any development
> cycle. The beauty of Open Source development is that the entire world can
> take part in it and appreciate the value of the software, warts and all.