[asterisk-dev] Zap channel naming is way too confusing
asterisk-list at 2.asterisk.bgcomp.co.uk
Sun Feb 26 05:12:47 MST 2006
On Sunday 26 Feb 2006 03:05, Steven wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 18:19 +0000, Bob Goddard wrote:
> > On Saturday 25 Feb 2006 16:00, Steven wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 10:56 +0000, Bob Goddard wrote:
> > > > Personally, I'd like to see different line types given different
> > > > naming conventions. TDM, PRI, BRI and dummy should not all come under
> > > > ZAP. Will it mean additional work, bloat and maintenance? Yes, but as
> > > > I see them all being different carrier hardware then I don't see why
> > > > not. If nothing else, it will help stop confusion. I can't help
> > > > feeling though, that I am in a minority of one.
> > >
> > > Hmm, let me point out why you are in the minority by taking your
> > > opinion and stretching it a bit further.
> > >
> > > Let us think about SIP for a moment, all SIP devices use the same
> > > driver, but there are differing devices on the other end with differing
> > > options and support. So let us split up SIP for Polycomms, Snoms,
> > > Proxies, and whatever else...
> > >
> > > Does that help point out why splitting the channel driver up because
> > > you want to expose up the information about the transport?
> > I think you are taking it to extreme. The SIP driver does not care what
> > type of phone or node is at the other end and does not use any kernel
> > devices. The zap stuff does and has to differentiate between pots and
> > ISDN. Why don't we go the whole hog then and have ISDN, pots, SIP, SCCP,
> > IAX and any other all have the same nomenclature then have * workout
> > the actual channel type on its own?
> Zap may need to know what the different types of technologies are, but
> asterisk mostly doesn't. Oddly enough, while not very practical, the
> various VoIP protocols could be moved under the Zap API and made
> independent of asterisk.
Well, yes. We seem to be at a halfway house at the moment. Look at
what happened to the BRI code. With chan_capi, we used BRI(), now
with chan_misdn it's ZAP(). Either we separate them out or amalgamate
them, but please, not what we have at the moment.
More information about the asterisk-dev