[asterisk-users] Running Multiple Instances of Asterisk

[James Texter]

But if I segment my zap channels, that shouldn't be an issue, correct?  I.e.
Instance 1 => Port 1, Instance 2 => Port 2, etc.  Of course, you are also
assuming there is Zap channels, as I believe he is using a gateway, which
takes that out of the equation.


On 9/25/06 2:23 PM, "Eric "ManxPower" Wieling" <eric at fnords.org> wrote:

> Best of luck getting multiple instances of Asterisk to play nice when
> accessing Zap channels.
> 
> 
> James Texter wrote:
>> Doug,
>>     I actually see this as a pretty logical way to solve the problem.
>> Please keep us posted if you have any luck sorting out running multiple
>> instances, or mail me off-list if no one else is interested.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> 
>> On 9/25/06 1:52 PM, "Douglas Garstang" <dgarstang at oneeighty.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Brian Rogan [mailto:brogan at syderial.com]
>>>> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 12:40 PM
>>>> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
>>>> Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Running Multiple Instances of Asterisk
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Doug,
>>>> 
>>>> Why do you want to do this to begin with?  I think the best
>>>> solution is
>>> Because we are trying to build a hosted IPT solution, not an enterprise
>>> solution.
>>> 
>>>> to use the realtime stuff, and build your own management tools, which
>>>> would allow you to do this (you could drastically cut the complexity
>>>> with the right tools).  Even if you could run them together, how
>>>> would you put everything on the appropriate ports?  How would you deal
>>>> with multiple instances accessing hardware?
>>> Realtime is resource intensive, requiring many queries to perform simple
>>> lookups. We can easily create multiple virtual IP address, and since each
>>> virtual IP address can bind to port 5060, each phone can register with
>>> domain.com:5060 without a problem. We don't need multiple instances to
>>> access
>>> hardware as this is a SIP only solution. Our PSTN access is via external
>>> Audiocodes gateways, not via Digium T1 cards.
>>> 
>>> The dial plan was not able to handle the complexity we needed (for example
>>> the
>>> MySQL() application command could not do nested queries), and so right now,
>>> we
>>> have a 2000 line python script and several very complex MySQL stored
>>> procedures in order to fulfull our requirements.
>>> 
>>>> I'm not convinced that maintaining the config files, binaries
>>>> and other
>>>> components of multiple asterisk's is easier than just building better
>>>> tools to configure one.
>>> I am. I look at our configuration which is currently for one customer, and
>>> there's already several dozen contexts in order to cover a lot of
>>> complexity.
>>> Multiply that by a couple of hundred, and I won't want to be administering
>>> it!
>>> 
>>>> You could also try User-Mode-Linux or something like that.
>>> I was going to give v-servers a try. There's a guide at:
>>> http://www.telephreak.org/papers/vpa/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
>>> 
>>> asterisk-users mailing list
>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>>>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
> 
> asterisk-users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

-- 
James Texter