[asterisk-users] [asterisk-app-dev] ARI application execution feature survey

[Joshua C. Colp]

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, at 9:06 PM, Sungtae Kim wrote:
> 
> On 4/3/19 1:29 AM, Joshua C. Colp wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, at 8:26 PM, Matthew Jordan wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 4:18 PM Joshua C. Colp <jcolp at digium.com> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, at 8:15 PM, BJ Weschke wrote:
> >>>   > I get the desired use case to run app_amd from within a Stasis
> >>>   > application, but I’m not sure about app_queue. You have everything at
> >>>   > your disposal within ARI itself to replicate all of the functionality
> >>>   > of app_queue and beyond.
> >>>
> >>>   Yes, there are certain applications which are logically building blocks to bigger applications. AMD is one of those which would be best if it were its own functionality within ARI, but allowing execution of the application is a good enough option. I don't think applications such as Queue, Dial, ConfBridge, Playback, Record or some others really make sense.
> >>>
> >> Assuming the TALK_DETECTION function isn't sufficient, it's worth
> >> noting that the information that AMD uses to make its decisions are
> >> available to the parts of Asterisk that make up ARI. I wonder if it
> >> would be better to simply wrap up the existing talk detection events
> >> under some other HTTP resource rather than open up this entire concept.
> > Ideally for AMD I think this would be preferred.
> >   
> >> While I'm pretty far removed from the guts of Asterisk these days, the
> >> notion of having dialplan applications be executed from within ARI just
> >> fills me with some fear. You can certainly open up some nightmare
> >> scenarios where people invoke Stasis from within Stasis recursively, or
> >> invoke GoTo or other dialplan context affecting applications.
> >>
> >> For that matter, many of the monolithic dialplan applications have
> >> specific options that place channels into dialplan contexts that
> >> execute after their execution. I'm not even sure I can begin to wrap my
> >> head around what that will do to a channel in ARI.
> > Indeed, that's why I suggested bringing it up on here precisely what applications people are needing to jump into the dialplan for. Best case those could be made first class citizens under ARI, but worst case I think a small subset could be allowed to be executed from ARI. I'm personally against allowing arbitrary execution of any application. There's just too many unknowns as you say.
> 
> Now I can see the problem too. But also I can see I'm not the only one 
> having a same dilemma.
> 
> Hm... What it suppose to be? I want implement this feature, but little 
> bit lost now.
> 
> I will wait for feedback.

I think waiting for now in case there's any additional input on what people jump to the dialplan is good. We can revisit in a week or so once everyone has had a chance to think about it and provide feedback, and then go from there.

-- 
Joshua C. Colp
Digium - A Sangoma Company | Senior Software Developer
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US
Check us out at: www.digium.com & www.asterisk.org

_______________________________________________
asterisk-app-dev mailing list
asterisk-app-dev at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-app-dev