[asterisk-dev] Viva Chan_Sip, may it rest in peace

Wed Oct 5 11:53:27 CDT 2016

Dan,

Sure. Please see this discussion: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/2015-October/075122.html

I know some of that has been addressed already, but it was a show-stopper for me at the time.

Michael

On Wednesday, October 05, 2016 05:23:27 PM Dan Jenkins wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Michael Ulitskiy <mulitskiy at acedsl.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > I am in the same situation. All my systems are business-critical and I'm
> >
> > yet to see a convincing argument to spend a lot of man power to migrate
> > the systems.
> >
> > Yes, pjsip supposed to be more stable, but chan_sip in asterisk 11 (with a
> > few custom
> >
> > patches) has been very stable for me. Yes, pjsip may have better
> > performance, but
> >
> > I'm using horizontal scalability, so that doesn't affect me much. Yes,
> > pjsip employ
> >
> > "sane, maintainable architecture, much easier to develop for" to quote one
> > of the
> >
> > developers, but last time I checked (about a year ago) it still lacked
> > feature parity
> >
> > with chan_sip.
> >
> >
> >
> > I did try to build a test system using pjsip about a year ago and at the
> > time my
> >
> > conclusion was "it's not ready". It may have changed and I'm planning to
> > look at it again
> >
> > in the next upgrade cycle, but please don't force it on me.
> >
> >
> >
> > So I guess I'm joining the crowd saying, please, make it more attractive,
> > provide feature
> >
> > parity with chan_sip and provide easy migration path. That'll go a long
> > way to get better
> >
> > adoption without pissing off and alienating users.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, October 05, 2016 08:22:21 AM Ryan Wagoner wrote:
> >
> > > Part of what is holding me back is all my systems are production critical
> >
> > > for businesses. I need a business case for real world improvements pjsip
> >
> > > has over chan_sip if I'm going to risk downtime and issues for hundreds
> > of
> >
> > > users.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > I'm currently running certified Asterisks 11 on all my installs. In the
> >
> > > past, versions before 1.8, just upgrading minor versions would cause
> >
> > > headache as things would break or occasionally Asterisk would crash. I
> >
> > > would have to read the changelogs and either back port a security fix or
> >
> > > undo a patch that broke something. I will say that with the improvements
> > to
> >
> > > the test suite this appears to no longer be an issue especially with
> >
> > > Asterisk 11.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > I still need to go through the 11 to 13 migration where the bridging
> >
> > > changes cause the CDR records to change. I have to set aside time to
> > bring
> >
> > > up a test system, make test calls, and rewrite my code that reads the CDR
> >
> > > table and assigns sales rep call credit. I'm planing to do this middle of
> >
> > > next year before 11 EOLs.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > I'm looking to migrate to pjsip towards towards the middle of the 13
> >
> > > lifespan or when 15 releases as I only install certified LTS releases. I
> >
> > > have patches for chan_sip to integrate with Exchange 2010/2013 including
> >
> > > MWI support and patches for device feature key synchronization for DND
> > and
> >
> > > CW. I haven't tested pjsip, but I know the later isn't supported.
> > Exchange
> >
> > > is mission critical so if there are issues and I can't figure out how to
> >
> > > write my own patches to solve it, I can't migrate to pjsip.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > I think it would be reasonable to say that Asterisk 15 LTS is the last
> >
> > > release for chan_sip. This gives everyone 6 years to migrate. In this
> > time
> >
> > > frame I have no doubt that the feature set and stability of pjsip will
> >
> > > improve.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Ryan
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:29 AM, Eric Klein <
> > eric.klein at greenfieldtech.net>
> >
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > James,
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > You missed a few points:
> >
> > > > 1. There needs to be a move in the training materials, and DCAP exam
> > away
> >
> > > > from (the soon to be depriciated) version 11 and move into versions
> > that
> >
> > > > support PJSip - familiarity will breed use.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > 2. One suggestion to do this was to declare that Chan_Sip would be
> >
> > > > depreciated in version 15 or 16. This would not mean removing it from
> > the
> >
> > > > code, but that going forward (for 1 or 2 more releases) it would only
> > get
> >
> > > > security fixes and no more development. This would have the benefit
> >
> > > > of everyone would have 3-5 years to learn and transition to PJSip
> > without
> >
> > > > breaking anything that is currently working, while releasing
> > development
> >
> > > > staff to improving the interface and problems with PJSip and other
> > parts of
> >
> > > > Asterisk.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Eric Klein
> >
> > > > VP of Customer Experience
> >
> > > > GreenfieldTech
> >
> > > > Mobile +972-54-666-0933
> >
> > > > Email Eric.Klein at greenfieldtech.net
> >
> > > > Skype: EricLKlein
> >
> > > > Web: http://www.greenfieldtech.net/
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >> Message: 5
> >
> > > >> Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 17:46:52 -0700
> >
> > > >> From: James Finstrom <jfinstrom at gmail.com>
> >
> > > >> To: Asterisk Developers Mailing List <asterisk-dev at lists.digium.com>
> >
> > > >> Subject: [asterisk-dev] Viva Chan_Sip, may it rest in peace
> >
> > > >> Message-ID:
> >
> > > >> <CAE3BMY2OBso2iF6xOR4wreGeSH-TsFh5=FV8NdZQxr_8F2Rb4A at mail.gm
> >
> > > >> ail.com>
> >
> > > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> So the discussion of deprecating chan_sip came up at the devcon this
> > year
> >
> > > >> and it caused a bit of a stir. The end result was the need for broader
> >
> > > >> discussion with a wider audience. So let's discuss.
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> Currently, Asterisk is running dual sip stacks. The argument is that
> > to
> >
> > > >> deprecate PJSIP there must be broader adoption. There is currently
> > nothing
> >
> > > >> motivating adoption but much slowing it.
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> What are some of the hurdles to adoption?
> >
> > > >> 1. Apathy. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Many would argue chan_sip
> > is
> >
> > > >> broke but it is the "devil you know". A decade of documentation and a
> >
> > > >> broad
> >
> > > >> user base allows people to be pretty forgiving of flaws. Almost any
> > issue
> >
> > > >> has some sort of work around or generally accepted idea of I guess we
> > can
> >
> > > >> live with it.
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> 2. One Ring to rule them all!! PJSIP requires up to 6 sections of
> >
> > > >> configuration. Once you dig in, this method makes sense. But at a
> > glance,
> >
> > > >> you have just multiplied the workload to 6 times that of chan_sip's
> >
> > > >> single
> >
> > > >> blob config. Though it is not really 600% more effort it may be
> > enough to
> >
> > > >> scare some away
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> 3. Mo Adoption, Mo problems!
> >
> > > >> The only way to clean up all the edge cases and weird bugs is to hit
> > them
> >
> > > >> in the first place. Dogfooding only gets you so far. You can make
> >
> > > >> anything working clean in a single environment and single use case.
> > But
> >
> > > >> what happens when people start flinging wrenches. Things break. 100
> >
> > > >> wrenches may break 10 things. 1000 wrenches may break 100 things. In
> > the
> >
> > > >> ladder case, you have 100 people saying pjsip sucks, and pjsip is
> > crap. As
> >
> > > >> with all things the 900 assume all is good and move on with their
> > lives
> >
> > > >> telling no one of their glory. So you have 10% of the voices running
> >
> > > >> unopposed. You fix the 100 issues and that is great but those 100
> > people
> >
> > > >> have gone back to the comfort of chan_sip and are stuck at point 1.
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> Escaping the cycle.
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> So how do we dredge through this mess and get high adoption?
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> You have to make #1 not an option. This means potentially breaking the
> >
> > > >> universe. This is why I think there is a tendency to be gunshy. No one
> >
> > > >> wants to be the guy who broke the universe. But breaking the universe
> >
> > > >> gets
> >
> > > >> us to #3 without falling back into #1. Once The universe breaks and we
> >
> > > >> are in #3 many of the edges will be found and fixed. Suddenly PJSIP
> >
> > > >> becomes
> >
> > > >> usable in most, if not all situations. The issues in #2 will
> > automatically
> >
> > > >> resolve as there is more information and it becomes the "accepted
> > way" of
> >
> > > >> doing things. The old dogs will have to refactor how they do
> >
> > > >> configuration
> >
> > > >> but I am confident once they do a few they will figure out the bark is
> >
> > > >> bigger than the bite.
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> tl;dr to get adoption you have to force it. There will be blood, but
> >
> > > >> nothing that can't be cleaned up with a little bleach and some elbow
> >
> > > >> grease
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >> --
> >
> > > >> James
> >
> > > >> -------------- next part --------------
> >
> > > >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >
> > > >> URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/
> >
> > > >> 20161004/71b91854/attachment-0001.html>
> >
> > > >>
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > --
> >
> > > > _____________________________________________________________________
> >
> > > > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > asterisk-dev mailing list
> >
> > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> >
> > > > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
> >
> > > >
> >
> > --
> > _____________________________________________________________________
> > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
> >
> > asterisk-dev mailing list
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> >    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
> >
> 
> 
> Michael,
> 
> What would be amazing is for you to tell us which features you are missing
> (or were missing when you tried)
> 
> If we start a working group around PJSIP migration then these points will
> help drive that forward.
> 
> Dan

Dan,

Sure.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20161005/1154d8f4/attachment-0001.html>