Open Stack

Paul Belanger <paul.belanger at polybeacon.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 07/01/2013 12:29 PM, Paul Belanger wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> On 06/30/2013 01:03 PM, Paul Belanger wrote:
>>>>> Personally, I would stay with Asterisk 1.8, but that is just my
>>>>> opinion. WebRTC support in Asterisk is still maturing and I wouldn't
>>>>> count on using it for production for a little longer.
>>>>
>>>> It's definitely bleeding edge.  I think the standards are still in flux,
>>>> as well.
>>>>
>>>> Since the primary use case here is conferencing, perhaps a more
>>>> compelling reason to use something newer than Asterisk 1.8 is the newer,
>>>> and much better conferencing application, ConfBridge, starting in
>>>> Asterisk 10.  It doesn't require special kernel support like the older
>>>> conferencing app, MeetMe.  It's more efficient, more configurable, and
>>>> has some basic video support.
>>>>
>>> I agree, I think the specific conference functionality need is going
>>> to drive which version of Asterisk we use.  Unfortantly, Asterisk 10
>>> is already in security fixes only, and EOL shortly [2]. So we should
>>> consider 1.8 or 11.
>>>
>>>>> As for the Asterisk package, don't expect to see anything greater then
>>>>> 1.8 from Debian / Ubuntu until some newly embedded libraries are
>>>>> removed.  I am not sure about REL, I'm sure Russell knows.  Other
>>>>> option are compiling from source or rolling our own packages, but not
>>>>> sure we'd want to take on that responsibility.
>>>>
>>>> You can get up to date packages for CentOS 6 from Digium.
>>>>
>>>> http://packages.asterisk.org/centos/centos-asterisk-11.repo
>>>>
>>>> I think that's what I would go with.  When Paul and I worked there, the
>>>> same thing was available for Ubuntu, but it has since died off.
>>>>
>>> I personally prefer Debian / Ubuntu, but ultimately falls to the
>>> -infra team (assuming they are managing) which OS to use. As for which
>>> packaging repo to use, I'd vote a distro over packages.asterisk.org,
>>> they tend to get more packaging love :)
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean by "love", but the version quoted as being in
>> precise, 1.8.10.1, was released in March of 2012.  The 1.8.x series is
>> up to 1.8.22 at this point.
>>
>> I personally really don't care about the distro.  I just want a modern
>> version of Asterisk while minimizing work needed to get it.
>>
>> I hope that Ubuntu package includes security patches.  The following
>> security bugs are present in 1.8.10.1:
>>
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-004.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-005.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-006.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-007.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-008.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-010.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-011.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-012.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-013.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-014.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2012-015.html
>> http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/security/AST-2013-003.html
>>
> Let me retract my comments about 'love', as they don't add to the
> conversation. Asterisk from Ubuntu is not actively maintained, Debian
> is another story, the pkg-voip team does a very good job dealing with
> security fixes.  However, Asterisk 11 is not in the repo yet do to
> embedded libraries.
>
>>>>> Here's the puppet modules I use for my asterisk deployments[1]. They
>>>>> worked great for my needs, however some work on my side would be
>>>>> needed to split them out.  I've been meaning to get around to doing
>>>>> it, but sadly other things come up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Managing Asterisk with Puppet works pretty well actually, I don't
>>>>> think I have had any issue between both of them.  The real decision
>>>>> point comes down to how you plan to configure asterisk, eg realtime vs
>>>>> static files.  I prefer static files, which makes puppet happier.
>>>>
>>>> How tied to Ubuntu and Asterisk 1.8 are your modules?
>>>>
>>> They are the only things supported right now.  Additionally, the
>>> manifests require specific functionally merged into Asterisk.  I
>>> believe Asterisk 11 has everything needed, but would have to double
>>> check.  My manifests rely heavy on specific configuration file
>>> functionality in Asterisk (EG: #include, #tryinclude statement). Like
>>> I said, the setup works great but we'd need to do some work on them to
>>> confirm Asterisk 11 would work.
>>>
>>> If we do decided to use the manifests, I don't have an issue stepping
>>> up and doing the leg work on them.  I need to do it eventually, and
>>> helping OpenStack would be a good cause.
>>>
>>> [2] https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Asterisk+Versions

Sorry I let this hang.

We're about to roll out our first production CentOS server, so I think
at this point we've crossed that bridge so we may as well slide down the
slope.  I'm sorry I couldn't mix any more metaphors in that sentence.

At any rate, yeah, we can handle CentOS6 now, and it sounds like from
what the two of you have written, it's probably the best bet for
Asterisk 11.

Paul, would you be interested in porting your modules to Asterisk 11 on
CentOS?

-Jim