No subject
Thu Jan 15 22:29:28 CST 2009
connecting legacy PBX to Asterisk (for the very same reason, those PBX use
TE-PTMP).
If others could join this thread and say if they agree or not with NT-PTMP
being the 2nd most needed mode, would be great.
Please, do not hesitate to comment.
>
>
> Right now, I would not preclude the possibility that NT-PTMP support
> might be added, but I could not give you a concrete time at which it
> will be done, since it will probably require some significant internal
> changes in libpri.
>
> To answer your final question, for now, if you need NT-PTMP mode, you
> should use mISDN.
I'm afraid this mISDN option is not very encouraging these days :
- misdn mailing list is not working these days (I'm hoping I'm wrong but it
seems to be the case),
- mISDN won't compile on latest 2.6.26 kernels so maybe mISDN developpers
are thinking B410P features inclusion in 1.6 sets a mark in Asterisk BRI
policy and it's not worth developing mISDN anymore.
So my opinion is that these NT-PTMP is really and urgently needed,
especially if this TEI management is rather complex and therefore would take
a long time to develop and stabilize.
The alternative is to keep using those Patton, Quintum, etc ... boxes which
is not what we would prefer ;-))
I don't want to be misunderstood while writing this memo :
- a very good job have been made lately in dahdi/libpri with "B410P
inclusion"
- if others are thinking NT-PTMP is needed or disagree with that, let them
say it here and now, as it might take a long time to integrate this feature
Regards
>
> Matthew Fredrickson
> Digium, Inc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>
> asterisk-users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>
--001636c5ad1b56719904615f48aa
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2009/1/24 Matthew Fredrickson <span dir=
=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:creslin at digium.com">creslin at digium.com</a>&g=
t;</span><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px so=
lid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class=3D"Wj3C7c">Olivier wrote:<br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> As you may know, these ISDN BRI features are very important here in<br=
>
> Europe as ISDN Basic Rate Access is very popular among Small & Med=
ium<br>
> Entreprises.<br>
> I don't really know why but it seems that in many countries, defau=
lt is<br>
> to install small PBX using Point-to-Multipoint (PtMP) mode as opposed =
to<br>
> Point-to-Point (PtP) which is the norm for PRI.<br>
><br>
> So basically, in several countries, SME are equipped today with PBX<br=
>
> connected with TE/PtMP interfaces to telco BRI lines.<br>
> When we address those SME, my opinion is that it's very useful to =
be<br>
> able to support any combination of TE/NT, PtP/PtMP modes.<br>
><br>
> Latest 1.6 Asterisk and 1.4.8 Libpri introduced a new set of welcomed<=
br>
> ISDN BRI features.<br>
> Unfortunately, NT/PtMP is not available at this time, in latest<br>
> Zaptel/Asterisk/Libpri.<br>
><br>
> My question is "what is the policy concerning NT/PtMP ?"<br>
> Is it really hard to extend Libpri to support this mode ?<br>
> Or shall mISDN remain the way to go when NT/PtMP is needed ?<br>
<br>
</div></div>Hey Olivier,<br>
<br>
I actually was the one that did a lot the work in adding the BRI support<br=
>
to libpri/chan_dahdi.</blockquote><div><br>I know how much we owe you=
for BRI support and lipri in general and I really thank you for that.<br><=
/div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(=
204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
NT PTMP is very significantly different, in that you have to do much<br>
more from a TEI management perspective.<br>
<br>
Most people's needs that I saw were actually fulfilled in using either<=
br>
NT or TE PTP or TE PTMP, since they were interfacing with PBXs or using<br>
TE-PTMP trunks from the telephone network to provide voice trunks for<br>
Asterisk.</blockquote><div><br>From my point of view, the most important fe=
ature is TE-PTMP as this the one used here (in France) when connecting a ne=
w Asterisk-based IPBX to ISDN (I really don't know why TE-PTP is not us=
ed for that).<br>
<br>From the same point of view, 2nd most needed feature is NT-PTMP when co=
nnecting legacy PBX to Asterisk (for the very same reason, those PBX use TE=
-PTMP).<br><br>If others could join this thread and say if they agree or no=
t with NT-PTMP being the 2nd most needed mode, would be great.<br>
Please, do not hesitate to comment.<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt=
0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><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.</blockquote><div><br>I'm afraid this mISDN opti=
on is not very encouraging these days :<br>- misdn mailing list is not work=
ing these days (I'm hoping I'm wrong but it seems to be the case),<=
br>
- mISDN won't compile on latest 2.6.26 kernels so maybe mISDN developpe=
rs are thinking B410P features inclusion in 1.6 sets a mark in Asterisk BRI=
policy and it's not worth developing mISDN anymore.<br><br>So my opini=
on is that these NT-PTMP is really and urgently needed, especially if this =
TEI management is rather complex and therefore would take a long time to de=
velop and stabilize.<br>
The alternative is to keep using those Patton, Quintum, etc ... boxes which=
is not what we would prefer ;-))<br><br>I don't want to be misundersto=
od while writing this memo :<br>- a very good job have been made lately in =
dahdi/libpri with "B410P inclusion"<br>
- if others are thinking NT-PTMP is needed or disagree with that, let them =
say it here and now, as it might take a long time to integrate this feature=
<br><br>Regards<br><br><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D=
"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padd=
ing-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
Matthew Fredrickson<br>
Digium, Inc.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a href=3D"http://www.api-digital.c=
om" target=3D"_blank">http://www.api-digital.com</a> --<br>
<br>
asterisk-users mailing list<br>
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:<br>
<a href=3D"http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users"=
target=3D"_blank">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users<=
/a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>
--001636c5ad1b56719904615f48aa--
More information about the asterisk-users
mailing list