[Asterisk-Dev] asterisk 'stable'?

[Jeremy McNamara]

Greg Boehnlein 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.
>
>  
>


Then please tell me how have we been able to scale Asterisk to deal with 
over 10,000 users?



Jeremy McNamara