[asterisk-users] AstManProxy

[Ishfaq Malik]

On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 10:02 +0100, Steve Davies wrote:
> On 20 May 2011 16:16, Ishfaq Malik <ish at pack-net.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-05-20 at 10:58 -0400, Leif Madsen wrote:
> >> On 11-05-20 09:37 AM, Ishfaq Malik wrote:
> >> > Do many people use this?
> >> > Is it reliable and safe?
> >>
> >> It may still work, but that code is quite old, and I'm not even sure it's
> >> necessary any more.
> >>
> >> Leif.
> >>
> 
> I use astmanproxy with Asterisk 1.6.2.18 - It works fine. The most
> recent version is on Github, and is not that old. In fact that reminds
> me that I really must upload my latest changes to my github fork of
> the project!
> 
> > The reasons I'm considering it are as follows:
> > Building a web page which uses AJAX to get information from the AMI
> > every 10-30 seconds or so and not wanting to log on and off via AMI that
> > many times.
> >
> > We'll soon be using multiple asterisk servers so having a single point
> > of access would be very useful.
> 
> Astmanproxy does seem to offer that, but it is not a feature I've used.
> 
> > I'd love for you to elaborate on why it's not necessary any more, is
> > there something simple I've overlooked?
> 
> - I run asterisk in high-priority mode, meaning that every AMI
> connection gets a "high priority socket" - Astmanproxy runs at a
> normal priority - That just feels like a nicer thing to be doing :)
> 
> - If a client fails to read its net socket fast enough, it affects
> astmanproxy, and not asterisk with the backlog.. Again, that just
> feels like a better way to do it.
> 
> - Astmanproxy offers filtering, which can be used to either reduce
> load on the client, to present information about a single
> device/channel only, or as a sanity layer to block or fix-up invalid
> requests by a client.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> Steve
> 

Cheers guys. Although now I'm back to square on about whether to use
AJAM or AstManProxy :(

Ish

-- 
Ishfaq Malik
Software Developer
PackNet Ltd

Office:   0161 660 3062