[OpenSIPS-Users] Fwd: RTPproxy project

[Bogdan-Andrei Iancu]

Brett, you put the finger on the wound :)

I looked around to other alternatives (to avoid re-inventing the wheel) 
- like mediaproxy or rtpengine - and I saw no carrier-grade features in 
the there  - please correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm looking to see if the problem is correctly identified and if there 
is a large consent in the community about this need. As we would like to 
through some resources into this (hopefully other parties too), as 
ideally we should be going in the right direction :)

Regards,

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com

On 27.05.2014 16:52, Brett Nemeroff wrote:
> Just wanted to add my 0.02 here..
>
> I totally agree with Bogdan. For the applications where opensips + a 
> RTP relay make sense, HA and persistence are much more important.
>
> WebRTC and ICE are kinda applications in of themselves. And although 
> these applications are going to grow in popularity, the "legacy" needs 
> for an RTP relay are still massively prevalent in the space. A general 
> push towards "Carrier Grade", resiliency and redundancy I think is 
> much better for the project as a whole.
>
> Not only that, consider that applications requiring ICE or WebRTC will 
> greatly benefit from HA / persistence, but not so much the other way 
> around :)
>
> YMMV
>
> -Brett
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 6:30 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
> <bogdan at opensips.org <mailto:bogdan at opensips.org>> wrote:
>
>     Hello,
>
>     As always, the truth is in the middle.
>
>     I agree RTPP is behind on certain things (and this is why we want
>     to do them), but on the other hand it is a good platform with
>     other good features (missing on the other relays). RTPP has better
>     ability in individually controlling the stream (audio /video),
>     ability to set timeouts and onhold with no conflicts, ability to
>     generates events on timeout, more flexibility in handling
>     symmetric / asymmetric NATs, ability to do media injection
>     (playback), ability to do call recording
>
>     What neither  mediaproxy, nor rtpengine have is a mechanism for
>     implementing RTP failover (for ongoing calls) or restart
>     persistence . This is something we want to look into. I would love
>     to have ICE and WebRTC on my media relay, for the HA and
>     persistence are more important I would say.
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>     OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>     http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>
>     On 24.05.2014 01 <tel:24.05.2014%2001>:59, Muhammad Shahzad Shafi
>     wrote:
>>
>>     To be honest, i have stopped using rtpproxy for over 2 years now.
>>     It is not evolving as fast as it should be, specially in the
>>     context of ICE and WebRTC technologies.
>>
>>     I would like to suggest that opensips team should consider adding
>>     support for rtpengine from SIPWise,
>>
>>     https://github.com/sipwise/rtpengine
>>
>>     For now mediaproxy from AG Projects is the only good choice for
>>     handling media in opensips with ICE support (though it still
>>     lacks WebRTC features).
>>
>>     Thank you.
>>
>>     On 2014-05-23 14:55, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
>>
>>>     Going for a public exposure on this question to Maxim, maybe we
>>>     will get an answer here.
>>>
>>>
>>>     -------- Original Message --------
>>>     Subject: 	RTPproxy project
>>>     Date: 	Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:03:31 +0300
>>>     From: 	Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>>     To: 	Maxim Sobolev
>>>     CC: 	Razvan Crainea
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     Hello Maxim,
>>>
>>>     Long time, no talks, but I hope everything is fine on your side.
>>>
>>>     I'm reaching you in order to ask about your future plans in regards to
>>>     the rtpproxy project? We see no much activity around it and other media
>>>     relays are popping around.
>>>
>>>     RTPP is an essential component for us, we invested a lot of work, we
>>>     have many patches (extensions) for it (which we want to push to the
>>>     public tree, but there is no answer on this) and we are also looking for
>>>     investing a lot into big future plans (as adding more functionalities).
>>>
>>>     Now, my question is - what is your commitment and disponibility for the
>>>     RTPP project ? depending on that we what to re-position ourselves, as we
>>>     do not want to waste time and work on things which are out of control.
>>>
>>>     Best regards,
>>>
>>>     -- 
>>>     Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>>     OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>>>     http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>>>
>>>
>>     -- 
>>     Mit freundlichen Grüßen
>>     Muhammad Shahzad
>>     -----------------------------------
>>     CISCO Rich Media Communication Specialist (CRMCS)
>>     CISCO Certified Network Associate (CCNA)
>>     Cell:+49 176 99 83 10 85  <tel:%2B49%20176%2099%2083%2010%2085>
>>     MSN:shari_786pk at hotmail.com  <mailto:shari_786pk at hotmail.com>
>>     Email:shaheryarkh at googlemail.com  <mailto:shaheryarkh at googlemail.com>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Users mailing list
>>     Users at lists.opensips.org  <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Users mailing list
>     Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140527/a7ee1600/attachment.htm>