[asterisk-users] What version to upgrade to...?

[Andrew Latham]

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Danny Nicholas <danny at debsinc.com> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
> [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Olivier
> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 8:27 AM
> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
> Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] What version to upgrade to...?
>
> 2011/12/12, Mike Diehl <mdiehl at diehlnet.com>:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have 2 servers running 1.6.2.9 and I'm about to build a third server.
>> This
>> suggests the possibility of doing a rolling upgrade of all of my servers.
>>
>> This brings up the question of what version to install and upgrade to.
>> I don't have many upgrade opportunities, so I'd like to get as much
>> bang for my buck.  Since I've applied some custom patches to my 1.6,
>> I'd also like to get to a new enough version that my patches would be
>> useful to the community.
>>
>> Should I go to 1.8.x?  Or all the way up to 10.x?  This is a
>> production system and I can't afford to be "testing" code.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Take care and have fun,
>> Mike Diehl.
>>
>>
>
> I'm roughly wondering the same thing.
>
> If I may add, I read few weeks ago, that Asterisk's SNMP features required
> asterisk to run as root. If any of  asterisk 1.8 or 10 version could solve
> this limitation, that would convince to dive in that one.
>
> I'm wondering if the bind 161 as root statement is a mis-statement or if
> not, maybe somebody like Tzafir can explain why since none of the other
> Asterisk binds require root access (this message is still in 10.0-rc3).
>

Any port under 1024 is a reserved system port and normally can only be
opened by root.  161 is under 1024, thus root.  You can run snmp on
other ports if you really want to.

-- 
~ Andrew "lathama" Latham lathama at gmail.com http://lathama.net ~