[asterisk-users] Realtime status feature - user feedback needed

[Atis Lezdins]

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 3:49 AM, Ex Vito <ex.vitorino at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 1:23 AM, Benoit Plessis <benoit at plessis.info> wrote:
>  > Tilghman Lesher a écrit :
>
> >  > Your question leads to this question:  why don't you create a proxy
>  >  > application that listens on AMI and populates a database outside of Asterisk,
>  >  > then do all your queries to that database?  That would provide exactly the
>  >  > same functionality, but it would not require a single change to the Asterisk
>  >  > codebase.  You could even contribute that application back as something
>  >  > in the "contrib/scripts" subdirectory.

True, that was one of initial options, however I prefer to NOT have
yet another layer. I will consider this as an option where
appropriate. However this looks quite awkward to me, somehow it
reminds me tailing queue_log or CDR and putting result into MySQL
database.. just one level more that way.

For now, I see only one point against this - having status cleared
upon module load/unload makes it easier to follow restarts/module
loads.

>  >  I second that,
>  >  If there is already a way to do things, why adding another one,
>  >  especialy if it's for caching reasons.
>  >  While we cannot say that asterisk fall into the KISS rule, it's not
>  >  a reason to let it grow.
>  >
>
>   Agreed. There should be ONE to do it, it should be SIMPLE and
>   as RELIABLE as possible, without interfereing (bad spelling?) with
>   asterisk's operations: the proxy into AMI looks like the way to
>   acheive the required funcionality... After all, that's exactly the
>   purpose of AMI !
>
>   Let's keep the codebase as small as possible, let's make asterisk
>   as solid and reliable as possible. Let's not reinvent wheels!

Ok, so we're exactly at the point. Yes, I agree that it would act
nearly the same way as AMI actions, however there's one great
advantage - It would be really easy to set this up for user. AMI proxy
would take more effort, need configuration, etc. Then there should be
much more development support for proxy than for code within asterisk
(if you have noticed, there's no new code, just reusing existing
functionality)

I think that there should be several ways how to do something, not
just one. Having realtime status won't mean that much changes, for now
I can see only 4 families for this - queue_members (already existing),
queue_callers, channels and meetme. Really nothing more to give full
overview of Asterisk Status.

Regards,
Atis

-- 
Atis Lezdins,
VoIP Project Manager / Developer,
atis at iq-labs.net
Skype: atis.lezdins
Cell Phone: +371 28806004
Cell Phone: +1 800 7300689
Work phone: +1 800 7502835