Slashdot Mirror
New Open Source VoIP PBX
dsginter writes "It looks like Asterisk isn't the only open source PBX game in town anymore. sipX, as the name implies, is a SIP-only PBX project released under the LGPL. A noteworthy feature is the inclusion of an out-of-the-box web-based management console. Read more about the release over at Voxilla."
SIPx appears to be a PBX only, with no way to attach real phones. Asterisk's primary appeal is that it integrates POTS and SIP. Who uses SIP and SIP alone?
And it's PBX4Linux. http://isdn.jolly.de/
Perhaps they were all reading the article? *gasp*
I know, it's more likely the comments were intercepted en-route by a pack of marauding ducks, but hey, it could happen.
I think the number of acronyms per slashdot article might be an indication of its geek-tech depth...
Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
So a pbx is a game? I think you meant name in town!
PBX: Private Branch Exchange (private telephone switchboard)
SIP: Serial Interface Protocol
Hopefully I managed to pick the right output from AcronymFinder. Looks like this is a technology that lets you route telephone calls within an organisation.
PABX: Private Automatic Branch Exchange
or
Private Access Branch Exchange (less common)
The only? What is this, IDG?
I can think of at least two right away:
There are probably others, feel free to add...
So, Is this really an important story?
What's particularly interesting with this product is that it includes a VoiceXML browser.
For those who aren't aware, VoiceXML is a cross platform markup language, visually similar to HTML, for writing IVR applications. VoiceXML pages can be served from any web server, and converted to voice on an VoiceXML browser. It interfaces seamlessly to Text To Speech and Voice Recognition servers.
My company, Integrics Ltd, does Asterisk, Cisco Call Manager, and SER installations. Up to now, we've done IVRs using Asterisk AGI for smaller systems, and VoiceXML on Cisco 2800 routers for larger systems. Being able to run VoiceXML on a free platform on Linux is going to be very interesting our customers. Needless to say, we're getting up to speed on sipX, and will be offering installation and development services as soon as it's mature.
Is that another VoIP company decided that Open Source is a good strategy. That's the real story!
How is it pronounced? Is it like "Spics?"
-Glitch "We all know Linux is great...it does infinite loops in 5 seconds." - Linus Torvalds
There seems to be some confusion over the acronyms on this topic, so I thought I would clarify some of them:
PBX: Private Branch Exchange - this is basically a computerised telephone switchboard, allowing even fairly small organisations to manage their own telephone networks at low cost.
SIP: Session Initiated Protocol - this is the protocol that is standard on most voice-over-IP devices.
COWBOYNEAL: Circulation Of Worthless Broadcasts Over Your Nearest External Authentication Location - this is a special extension to the voice-over-IP standard allowing fast delivery of esoteric technological news to compliant devices. It also has the convenient property of always being last on selection fields in the user interface.
One good turn - gets all the covers.
Come on now. I think he meant "the only name in town" - that's allot more popular.
"There's a new name in town..." !!!
See yate.null.ro for Yet another telephony engine. there's some stuff like SER and openh323-something...
that there is NO (nada) real stable or feature rich native SIP VoIP client for linux available that matches the available Windows programs.
thats sad. we dont need more server PBX's. We need cutting edge client desktop applications.
just my 2c.
copper 2 pair. I remember when telco technology was simpler. The early telephone networks were really not much more then advance tin-can and string communication. Humans manually switching and routing calls. Alexander Graham Bell likely had no idea of what he was creating with his invention.
What I love about telco technology is how much of it is piggybacked onto the original design - the basic phone - mic/speaker isn't dramatically different now, copper 2 pair is still used - we've piggybacked technologies like DSL onto it and added the digital components, but the wires are similar enough to what was used. Now like a hundred years or so since the early days of telecommunications here we are with VOIP and SIP and even though the technologies are new the basic ideas are similar enough that AGB could probably get up to speed quick enough. Kinda like I imagine Babbage would be with an IMAC.
The rock, the vulture, and the chain
Redundant?
LMAO, mod's, who needs em!
- http://www.milkme.co.uk
Enjoyed your post, but should point out that only one pair is needed for telephone communication, including ringing. The two pair is a more recent wiring standard.
Really?
.
"The only NAME in town" ?
First I have heard that phrase.
Are you sure that you have not misheard it?
In fact, "the only GAME in town" is such a popular phrase that it is a title of a lame 1970's movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066184/
The phrase "A new name in town" might be more common than "The only game in town", although I doubt it, however the context in which the phrase is used in the original post indicates that the poster meant the later phrase and not the former.
If he had wanted to use the former he would have said, "It looks like there's a new name in town when it comes to open source PBX."
Perhaps the authors inclusion of qualifying text "open source PBX" in the sentence made it a little less clear.
Remove the text and it is like tab.
watashi wa bengoshi dewa arimasen!
Yate (Yet Another Telephony Engine) is also a gateway and a PBX.
It supports H323 (much better then asterisk), SIP (with a nice stack that it can be actualy reused), IAX2 (with a forked version of libiax2), and ISDN (PRI and BRI) using zaptel drivers.
The best part is that is much more flexibile then any other similar project around. Is not like sipX just SIP based, and is not like Asterisk a emulation of PSTN over VoIP. Is a real VoIP server that actualy deal also with PSTN.
And can any of these systems let me make POTS phone calls for the price of setting one up and a broadband connection?
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
I'm still unsure of why people would setup their phone systems this way. I looked at setting up a VOIP box in my house, but it seemed to me that you had to pay a company for the phone service routing. The prices weren't cheap either. Am I missing something?
WURD!!
I have never sought out a GUI interface for asterisk.
If I wanted a GUI interface, I would have looked for a MS based solution. Isn't that obvious?
From what I have read, and experienced, IAX is a superior protocol to SIP, principally due to it's handling of NAT and firewall issues. It just works, and it works well. I can send an IAX adapter to the far side of the world, and have the user plug it in. Without the need to add rules to their router, I can connect and Voila, they are talking.
I am very pleased with Asterisk. I have only begun to utilize it's vast capabilitites.
It appears that SIPX is targeting the user who wants simplicity. Most windows users are attracted to simplicity. Ergo: Asterisk is like linux, manually configured and extremely powerful. Sipx is like windows, give me a dialog box to type in my phone number, and that is all I want.
DISCLAIMER: I have never used SIPX, but a quick look at the website, and pulling up blank pages for the readme's tells me alot!
The binaries from SIPfoundry are built for FC 2. The source builds on more or less any Un*x. There is also a commercially packaged/supported version from Pingtel that runs on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.
$7.99 a month for the number, plus $0.02 per minute. With Asterisk, you can keep your land line (for the directv) and have it route local calls via the landline for the unlimited free local calling your teenagers need.
anybody know? the web page isn't very clear about that.
One thing that the press releases are not capturing is that there are a considerable number of installations that are combining sipX and Asterisk in order to mix-and-match their best features. Both sipX and Asterisk are quite configurable enough to route calls between each other like this. And since both use SIP, the connection Just Works.
This signals the start of turning telephony into a building-block technology (like Internet technology) and moving away from the huge, monolithic (and vastly overpriced) systems of the telcos.
What we still have, though, are "islands" of SIP, mostly PBXs inside companies, and for most other traffic, you have to gateway to or from the PSTN. (What Vonnage supplies that's interesting and expensive is comprehensive gatewaying to/from the PSTN, not VoIP itself.) But in a little while, the chances will be high enough that the person you are calling is not on the PSTN that a significant fraction of calls can be handled SIP-only. That's when real change will start. And for that matter, there will be some serious business opportunities a la "Chrossing the Chasm".
If only sipX would support IAX2 protocol, we'd have
a really useful component which would peer with
Asterisk servers and be operable over stupid NAT
devices such as the majority of connected systems
use to connect to the Internet.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
It's dead, Jim.
You might consider looking at little more closely at www.sipfoundry.org. What you will find is that sipX is configuarble in the way you describe, using xml. You can tweak all the nobs. However, some classes of users like a management tool - not bad just different, recognizes that there are a lot of players who might open source attractive The Windows vs. Linux analogy is off-base.
so - great idea. any interest in working on that? I think it would be great to get this going. Mind posting it on the sipx dev mailing list?
Pingtel also claim to have an open source PBX.
I have no experience with it though but from their site, they say:
Pingtel's Enterprise SIPxchange PBX is the first enterprise-grade IP PBX available in open source, and that fully embraces the Session Initiation Protocol (SIPxchange PBX works with a variety of Media Gateways, Phones, and Servers.)
there is a Gentoo build at http://wiki.calivia.com/index.php/Main_Page
http://scm.sipfoundry.org/rep/sipXvxml/main/README
Not much to it.. eh?
But the wiki looks promising:_ the_sipX_Voicemail_and_Auto-attendant_system&actio n=edit
How to use the sipx Voicemail and autoattendent system:
http://wiki.calivia.com/index.php?title=HowTo_use
How to configure the sipx call routing engine:f igure_the_sipX_call_routing_engine&action=edit
http://wiki.calivia.com/index.php?title=HowTo_con
Where does one go to learn about Sipx? The screenshots of the GUI interface?
Thanks anyway....
For front ends, there is switchvox, which wraps Asterisk.
There is an installation guide at that covers how to get started. There is also a link on the project page to an administration guide that goes into more detail (this is the Pingtel documentation - requires registration, but is free and covers the same material).
Sipx from pingtel was released as open source as early as early/mid 2004. This is not new at all.. Someone needs to keep their posts straight or get quicker information sources.
I'm a developer for Yate (http://yate.null.ro) and i have try to compile that sip stack. After getting to 2 Gb i have quit. I have look for like 6 months for a good SIP stack, we've ended by doing our own SIP stack. You want to know why? Because it dosen't crush. In fact one of Yate jobs was to work as a H.323-SIP signalling proxy, because sipfoundry stack didn't manage to route more then 15 calls. What are we talking about here? About telephony which must be stable or about some Windows game?
yes, documentation, like Rome, is not built in a day. However, if you are after something specific pls. post of the sipX dev list. You'll get info right away.
thanks for clarifying. the stack actually runs at about 40 calls per second now and is completely stable. the reSIPprocate stack is also on SIPfoundry, is used for high-performance session border controllers, among other applications, and is also fast and stable. Of course, these stacks may not have been fast or light enough for your particular needs, and so you have built your own. Great. But that does not reflect on the quality and value of stacks for other applications, nor of the sip PBX, proxy, softphone or UA applications, so the "Windows game" comment is maybe a little bit gratuitous. It might also have been useful to you work w/in the SIPfoundry community to build the stacks you needed. You may have ended up w/ what you wanted with broad community support? Perhaps there avenues for collaboration? Shall we go off-line and discuss? ossip99@yahoo.com
It seems that i've end up with a stack that have 90 K of code and is flexibile enough to be used for a client, or a server or a proxy in a single or multi threaded program. Is called YASS (Yet Another SIP Stack), and when is compiled it actualy have something like 83k now (of course we will develop it). I've try sipfoundary in the past and i know how huge is it. And the test i've told you about have been for a SIP - H.323 signalling proxy not for pure SIP. For pure SIP, SER which is a very good SIP router can handle 40 calls on an embedded systems.
I still didn't see your answer regarding the size of the sipX. Actualy one year ago i have download the CVS and i have try to compile sipX. After getting 2 GB of my free space the compilation crushed. I have never seen such a horribile way of abusing C++ like that project - exceptions, template - many levels, you name it. Is all there.
sorry, missed the question. the sipXTAPI, which includes the stack, media processing, call processing and the API is about 850k and the stack alone is about 500k. Anyway, you insist on being insulting w/out out being productive. Best of luck
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
I see that sipX is in fact just a LGPL'ed sipxchange (pingtel corp.). sipxchange is quite possibly one of the messiest software products ever to have been created. Please look another way :)
How do I hook up a local phone line to asterisk? I want to use my local phone line for all local calls and VoIP for international calls.
So how do I link my local phone line cord to a box running asterisk? do I need a special card or adapter? How much are these and are they compatible with Linux? Please suggest one if you can.
can you recommend one of these systems (or another) for me? I've never done any PBX before. I am looking for a system which would let me connect approx 30 properties in a small housing association together in the UK, unlikely to be more than 50 connection points. Some of the software discussed sounds like it is for really big projects, has way too much functionality... On a definitely tight budget, hence interested to find out if it's possible to set this up as a community rather than pay for a high end contractor to come in. Could you recommend particular software? warn of any potential pitfalls? Users are a mixed demographic, a geeks, mainly average computer users or novices who use their computers for web browsing and email Would be good to also connect houses where there is just a POTS telephone. cheers.
You have it *exactly* backwards. Please allow me to explain.
First, context/history. I'm a Unix dude at the DNA level. I was writing C code to build curses applications on 68000-based Unix Version 7 boxes when most of you were still sucking baby bottles. (Curses? Mr. Peabody-- you set the wayback machine too far back!) My Pingtel cofounder and I built the worlds biggest Unix-based massively-parallel processors at BBN in 1987-1992, he being the Unix OS software engineering team lead. We were contributing to IETF standards back before most people knew what the IETF is. I use a mac now, but it's Unix with a nice face.... ;-)
When we approached the design of SIPx (and the phone, and all the other products we built), we designed them in "the Unix way." SIPx is architected as a set of separate applications that each do their job well, and then work with other to build a system. So there are:
The bits can be used together to build an IP PBX. OR, you can use the case core components in different combinations to build other stuff, like call routers, media application servers, etc. Heaven knows we built a ton of different things and threw them away without productizing them while I ran Pingtel.
And all of it leverages Unix and IP network stuf to the hilt. We opted for DNS records for load balancing, blah blah blah.
In contrast, my last look at Asterisk code (admittedly about 8 months ago) showed the code was architected *exactly* the opposite way. It appeared to be a more monolithic, but pluggable architecture. Just as Pingtel's code base shows its roots in being a spectacular user agent, Asterisk showed its roots in being a well-developed extension to the Digium gateway card. (Both have pros/cons). Mark, I'm sure you'll read this, so please forgive me for saying this - I promise to try to be as professional and fair as possible in industry events, contacts, etc. But IMHO, when I read Asterisk code, I had deja vu of code supplied by companies from whom I've bought hardware in my 25 year tech career, e.g. ethernet chips/drivers, DSP chips/libraries, etc. Good, useful stuff, but not the same as something architected from top down.
But when taken as a whole, my read of the Asterisk code was that it was more like a PC-based PBX software application that has grown. A little like Windows still shows its roots in DOS (not *really* multi-user, etc.)
In contrast, the sip foundry (Pingtel's old) code base is really a set of modular components that can be strung together to make a variety of things. Kind of like Unix shell applications with pipes, or daemons working with applications, etc. Kind of like Unix.
So "SIPx = Windows" is exactly backwards, and (IMHO, though you are free to throw rocks at my analysis), "Asterisk != Linux/Unix."
I'm clearly biased. I stopped writing C code in 1994, and I haven't written C++ code in 8 years (though I still dabble with Java, you can challenge me to anything you want in CSS). But I'm competent, confident in my judgement, and don't want SIPx to take a rap it doesn't deserve. It has huge legs, several tens of millions of $ of VC-backed engineering investment, and as an open source project will -- I hope -- get the community backing it deserves.
-jb
PS -- I'm not going to throw too many stones at IAX because I'm not as conversant as I should be to defend myself. But don't you want to take advantage of the dozens of other SIP-based products and services that are in the market? IAX is nice, but a distraction. SIP has firewall stuff figured out, too; we just need to get it into the SIP Foundry code.
You can actualy use Yate as a SIP - IAX proxy and it also work on embedded systems like Linksys Wireless Access Point, or any other uclibc device.
was that really necessary? I'll have you know, I *am* a jew, and this jew will shove that white sheet of yours up your arse, soaked in gasoline. Then I'll charge the neighbor kids $1 to throw lit matches at you to see who "wins"...(after all we jews have to make a buck where we can, right?...if you're going to buy into stereotypes, might as well buy into all of them)
Who cares about the ozone layer?...thanks to CFC's I can write my name......IN CHEESE!!!