<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/1/26 Benoit <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:maverick@maverick.eu.org">maverick@maverick.eu.org</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Olivier a écrit :<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">> From my point of view, the most important feature is TE-PTMP as this<br>
> the one used here (in France) when connecting a new Asterisk-based<br>
> IPBX to ISDN (I really don't know why TE-PTP is not used for that).<br>
</div>Well this may depend of some parameter. We have a dual BRI line from<br>
France Telecom, in PTP mode.</blockquote><div><br>Yes, also, I really don't know what makes a France Telecom line be configured in PTP or PTMP.<br><br>Anyway, according your own experience, how frequent is this PTP case ?<br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">><br>
> From the same point of view, 2nd most needed feature is NT-PTMP when<br>
> connecting legacy PBX to Asterisk (for the very same reason, those PBX<br>
> use TE-PTMP).<br>
><br>
> If others could join this thread and say if they agree or not with<br>
> NT-PTMP being the 2nd most needed mode, would be great.<br>
</div>Well, i agree on something, when you are using PTMP mode, being able to<br>
do it both way is very usefull (for transperency placing an * between a<br>
legacy pabx and the 'outside world').<br>
However it's when their is at least one NT mode, you could always<br>
reconfigure the pabx (but you lose the ability to reconnect him directly<br>
to the bri line<br>
in case of problem)</blockquote><div><br>That's the point : as much as possible, we're trying to avoid any re-configuration of legacy equipment.<br><br>So, how would you order TE/NT, PtP/PtMP combination starting from the most useful (for yourself) to the least one.<br>
For instance, myself, I would classify them like this :<br>1. TE PtMP (the most needed)<br>2. NT PtMP<br>3. TE PtP<br>4. NT PtP (the least needed)<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
> Please, do not hesitate to comment.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Right now, I would not preclude the possibility that NT-PTMP support<br>
> might be added, but I could not give you a concrete time at which it<br>
> will be done, since it will probably require some significant internal<br>
> changes in libpri.<br>
><br>
> To answer your final question, for now, if you need NT-PTMP mode, you<br>
> should use mISDN.<br>
><br>
><br>
> I'm afraid this mISDN option is not very encouraging these days :<br>
> - misdn mailing list is not working these days (I'm hoping I'm wrong<br>
> but it seems to be the case),<br>
> - mISDN won't compile on latest 2.6.26 kernels so maybe mISDN<br>
> developpers are thinking B410P features inclusion in 1.6 sets a mark<br>
> in Asterisk BRI policy and it's not worth developing mISDN anymore.<br>
</div><div class="Ih2E3d">> NT PTMP is very significantly different, in that you have to do much<br>
</div>Their is an unannonced mISN-1.1.9 release (and even 1.1.9.1 now). Since<br>
their is no release note i can't say for sur they fixed this<br>
but this may be worth a try<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">><br>
> So my opinion is that these NT-PTMP is really and urgently needed,<br>
> especially if this TEI management is rather complex and therefore<br>
> would take a long time to develop and stabilize.<br>
> The alternative is to keep using those Patton, Quintum, etc ... boxes<br>
> which is not what we would prefer ;-))<br>
</div>Why so ?<br>
As for myself am very interested in red-fone boxes, being able to<br>
separate the ipbx and the PRI 'access point' ahs some advantage (easier<br>
resiliency)</blockquote><div><br>I agree that separating functions into several boxes is fine but today, it would be touchy (if possible) to build all boxes using Asterisk and Digium boards ...<br>If we want Asterisk ecosystem to develop (buying boards paying software development), it's important to be able to build those boxes using components made by companies contributing to Asterisk code ...<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a href="http://www.api-digital.com" target="_blank">http://www.api-digital.com</a> --<br>
<br>
asterisk-users mailing list<br>
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:<br>
<a href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users" target="_blank">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>