Interview with Mark Spencer of Asterisk 124
comforteagle writes "OSDir has published an interview with Mark Spencer of Asterisk and Gaim about why and how he got started coding up the software platform PBX system and how it has become much more than -just- another phone system. He also shares his insights for the opportunities within the telecom industry for open source."
* is the killer linux app (Score:5, Informative)
Samba is great. qmail/sendmail/ect...is wonderful as well. But, as far as getting linux in the door, this is the application that will do it. For example, my first * implementation cost about 8grand ( parts and service ).
For a similar, but far less featured pbx from avaya, I was quoted 40grand. And that was a quote. Anybody here that has worked with phone venders should be chuckling right now at that number, as it amounts to a pie in the sky dream.
So, for my small business, I saved them 30 grand right up front ( likely more ). On top of that, as their needs change, so can the phone system. Just the other day they found out I was taking my desk phone home ( to play with, but also get my phone calls ). When I told them why, they were floored that the system could do that, no matter how many times I told them it could.
Larger businesses will see far more dramatic cost savings, and get more features to boot.
Re:And PBX is...? (Score:2, Informative)
A telephone system.
Re:And PBX is...? (Score:4, Informative)
It's like a router with a NAT... Only for telephones not the internet...
Re:* is the killer linux app (Score:3, Informative)
About 2k was for phones. This was a small installation with some very specific needs.
Re:And PBX is...? (Score:4, Informative)
Systm video cast on iTunes (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What an timing :) (Score:2, Informative)
http://revision3.com/systm/asterisk [revision3.com]
You don't even need Asterisk... (Score:4, Informative)
Otherwise, when I go to a computer recycling depot, all I see is Asterisk boxes.
I have run 4 lines on my 450MHz box with no degradation at all.
You can buy cheap FXO cards for $10 and unlock Vonage Linksys PAP2s for $10 per FXS port.
Slap that together with a $25 PowerMAC 9600 and bam!
5 FXO + 10 FXS and witness the power of a fully operational PBX system for 175 bucks!
Re:Systm video cast on iTunes (Score:5, Informative)
Asterisk@Home (Score:5, Informative)
Old News - Newer interview here (Score:4, Informative)
http://gabcast.com/index.php?a=episodes&query=&b=
Re:And PBX is...? (Score:5, Informative)
This is True! (Score:3, Informative)
It's not all that esoteric to set up, either. I didn't even bother with the various GUI configuration tools you can download. I did have better luck compiling it myself rather than using the one that Debian has packed for it, but that may have changed since I tried it.
If I were in the business of making commercial PBX systems, I'd be shaking in my boots right now. I think Asterisk will end up putting the lot of them out of business.
the only source of information you will ever need (Score:4, Informative)
Re:You don't even need Asterisk... (Score:2, Informative)
Here is one for $5:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Digium-Wildcard-FXO-card-for-
$10: http://cgi.ebay.com/Clone-of-Digium-X100P-X101P-W
Buy it now $13: http://cgi.ebay.com/Asterisk-FXO-PCI-Card-OEM-X10
Buy it now $15:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Digium-Wildcard-X100P-OEM-FXO
Yes you have to factor in shipping, but if you buy multiples you can get that down.
These are generally Clone cards that work every bit as good as the originals.
The orginals were just Intel v.92 modems anyway.
http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/X100P+clone [voip-info.org]
Hope that helps.
Re:Like others have said, it IS the killer Linux a (Score:3, Informative)
No, I don't think you do need one at all. All of the digital signal processing is handled in software. Digital/analog conversion is either done in the FXS/FXO cards, for traditional phones, or in the phone itself if you are using VOIP phones (that's why it matters what codecs the phone supports).
A killer app on its way... (Score:2, Informative)
As a Unix sysop for long time, with some knowledge in general VoIP/H.323/SIP, I would say that the jump into Asterisk is not too dificult. We use SSH/vi/etc. in our day-to-day task, so one more system is not hard to swallow.
However I would like to point out that unless you are a really small user, with standard needs, for example in a situation where Asterisk@Home resolves all your needs, or you can live using only SIP or IAX, you will have some problems.
Asterisk will be a killer-app, but it is not there yet. Each new version tends to break something, configuration switches are added or removed, new features, are added changing the way things should be done, behavior of old functionality changes, etc. Its great, but its still evolving. Just check the mailing list and you will see the kind of problems that arise, and are resolved by the community.
Evolving is a Good Thing, but you have to take that into account before jumping in.
Pablo.
Mark Spencer & Digium at SoCal Linux Expo (Score:2, Informative)
Re:And PBX is...? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Systm video cast on iTunes (Score:1, Informative)
Speaking of Asterisk as a killer app because it saves business so much money is just one facet. Another equally if not more important facet is the new possibilities introduced with an open platform. IMHO it's the same reason that Linux has gone so far: Simply put, openness breeds innovation.
Local talk (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Asterisk has helped by showing us what not to d (Score:3, Informative)
"Licensing
Freeswitch is licensed under the terms of the MPL 1.1"
this license is *not* compatible with the gpl. even mozilla.org has stopped using this license:
Mozilla Relicensing FAQ
http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html [mozilla.org]
mozilla is relicensing all of their code under a triple mpl/lgpl/gpl license in order to make their products compatible with the gpl. please consider doing the same with freeswitch.
read this if you need some more convincing as to why to relicense:
Make Your Open Source Software GPL-Compatible. Or Else.
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/gpl-compatible.htm
bottom line, if freeswitch isn't gpl-compatible it's much less likely to be successful.
Re:stuff to fix (Score:3, Informative)
And if you're using IAX2, you don't need to use Zaptel normally. The only reason you'd need to use Zaptel with IAX2 is if you were doing IAX trunking, something which most people do not do.
A little bit of background for those readers unfamiliar with the issues. Telephone systems use a very strict timer of 8000 Hz. Given that this is far too heavy of an interrupt load for the PCI bus, Asterisk compromises and uses a 1000Hz interrupt, moving 8 samples for each interrupt. The RTC is close to 1000, but really isn't: it generates a 1024Hz interrupt. We compensate for the RTC clock in systems which don't have Zaptel hardware by ignoring 24 interrupts per second, thus letting us move the same 8,000 samples per second. Unfortunately, because we have to ignore some interrupts, the samples spacing is not quite equidistant, so there's some audio jitter caused by using RTC. It's not terrible, but it's not optimal.
Zaptel, in additional to the telephony interface needed, whether it be T1, E1, or analog, also generates that nice consistent 1000Hz interrupt. Note that in systems that especially interface to the PSTN digitally (i.e. T1 or E1), we absolutely MUST match the timing of the PSTN exactly. 1024 minus 24 is not "good enough". This is the primary reason why we must have an accurate timer and why Asterisk relies intrinsically upon having such a timer available. Given that you have an accurate timer available, why would you code to anything else?
The zaptel driver is a crude piece of crap that was rejected by the kernel developers. It is unfit for serious use.
I'm unaware that Zaptel has ever been submitted to the kernel developers, let alone rejected. Frankly, the code moves too quickly for us to consider letting it be maintained by the kernel developers. Even if it was in the kernel, the stock kernel driver would be unlikely to be ever used, given that it would almost always be out of date. That's quite simply just wasted effort on maintenance by kernel developers. I'm sure we can all agree that the kernel developers have more important issues to deal with. As to the zaptel driver being "unfit", well, it's used in thousands of Asterisk systems around the world with no problem at all. This declaration that it's unfit sounds suspiciously like FUD.