[hydra-dev] Demo for astricon

[Russell Bryant]

On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 11:26 -0700, John Todd wrote:
> On Aug 2, 2010, at 1:33 PM, Tim Panton wrote:
> > I also thought about some sort of viral propagation concept,
> > this might need to be licenseing based (as with DUNDi) where
> > the expectation is all hydra instances can (by default) talk to each
> > other over the net.
> 
> This is a really great idea!  However, should we restrict to E.164?   
> There are some pretty hefty considerations to be made about what data  
> would be exchanged between systems, and what, exactly, would be the  
> protocol.  DUNDi is the obvious choice for number-based meshing.  What  
> about non-E.164?  SIP URIs don't seem to need any mesh ideas - they  
> have the DNS, and that works quite well.  XMPP is in the same boat.   
> Freenum.org/ISN is in the same boat.  So really, I suppose I've  
> answered my own question - only E.164 numbers would probably be  
> considered (or private E.164 numbers or sub-numbers, but those  
> wouldn't be meshed publicly.)

DUNDi with E.164 in Asterisk never seemed to take off.  Digium isn't
even a peer in that network anymore as far as I know.  I suspect the
E.164 DUNDi network may be completely gone at this point.  What could be
done differently to make it not fail like it did before?  If there is
something that could be done, why hasn't it been done already for
Asterisk?  I'm just asking the questions because I think it would be a
good retrospective to have to ensure we understand what didn't go well
before.

DUNDi has been very successful for private usage, though.  However,
Hydra's architecture and native interfaces will provide what DUNDi
provides to Asterisk in those areas.

-- 
Russell Bryant
Digium, Inc.  |  Engineering Manager, Open Source Software
445 Jan Davis Drive NW   -    Huntsville, AL 35806  -  USA
jabber: rbryant at digium.com    -=-    skype: russell-bryant
www.digium.com -=- www.asterisk.org -=- blogs.asterisk.org