Greetings-
I'm about to dive into the process of virtualizing some of my Asterisk
(primarily 1.4.x) infrastructure. In the past, when looking at virt solutions,
the primary issue preventing me from moving was the lack of proper timing. We
do not need it for MeetMe but rather for IAX2 trunking.
ist - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: [asterisk-users] State of Asterisk+Virtualization+Timing
Greetings-
I'm about to dive into the process of virtualizing some of my Asterisk
(primarily 1.4.x) infrastructure. In the past, when looking at virt solutions,
the primary issue preventing me fr
2011-11-01 18:08, Tim Nelson skrev:
> Greetings-
>
> I'm about to dive into the process of virtualizing some of my Asterisk
> (primarily 1.4.x) infrastructure. In the past, when looking at virt
> solutions, the primary issue preventing me from moving was the lack of proper
> timing. We do not ne
It would be nice if we can get it going with KVM. Cloud computing solutions
are moving towards the true linux based kernel vs. FreeBSD of XEN.
Cheers,
Nick.
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Johan Wilfer wrote:
> 2011-11-01 18:08, Tim Nelson skrev:
>
> Greetings-
>
> I'm about to dive into the
Look at upgrading to at least 1.6.2 or 1.8, these both have newer timing
sources that don't rely on dahdi. Also, if conferencing is a big deal, look at
10, this contains a complete rewrite of ConfBridge which doesn't require dahdi
for mixing at all.
Thanks,
--Warren Selby, dCAP
On Nov 1, 2011
On Tue, 2011-11-01 at 12:08 -0500, Tim Nelson wrote:
> Greetings-
>
> I'm about to dive into the process of virtualizing some of my Asterisk
> (primarily 1.4.x) infrastructure. In the past, when looking at virt
> solutions, the primary issue preventing me from moving was the lack of proper
> ti
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Nic Colledge wrote:
Have you thought about using LXC rather than OpenVZ.
+1
There are a few references to allowing guest access to timing hardware
online.
Simples. Load up the dahdi modules in the host and all the containers see
it.
I've only been playing with it rec
Do you gents feel that KVM and XEN hog too much resources which in
turn effects the functionality of Asterisk?
I really like the idea of Asterisk as an appllicance, for reasons
stated in this email. It just makes life all pretty and green.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
___
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 03:50:21PM +, Gordon Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Nic Colledge wrote:
>
> >Have you thought about using LXC rather than OpenVZ.
>
> +1
>
> >There are a few references to allowing guest access to timing
> >hardware online.
>
> Simples. Load up the dahdi modu
.digium.com] On Behalf Of Tzafrir Cohen
[tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 6:03 AM
To: Asterisk Users List
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] State of Asterisk+Virtualization+Timing
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 03:50:21PM +, Gordon Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Nov 2011,
, November 07, 2011 6:03 AM
> To: Asterisk Users List
> Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] State of Asterisk+Virtualization+Timing
>
> On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 03:50:21PM +, Gordon Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Nic Colledge wrote:
>>
>> >Have you thought about
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 08:00:35AM -0500, Michelle Dupuis wrote:
> Although you say "SIMPLE"...not all virtualization hosts allow
> software installation. On VMware the host has become an appliance you
> can't really mess with...
VMWare (Along with KVM and Xen) is a different beast. LXC (as is Op
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 03:50:21PM +, Gordon Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Nic Colledge wrote:
>
> >Have you thought about using LXC rather than OpenVZ.
>
> +1
>
> >There are a few references to allowing guest access to timing
> >hardware online.
>
> Simples. Load up the dahdi mod
risk Users List
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] State of Asterisk+Virtualization+Timing
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 03:50:21PM +, Gordon Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Nic Colledge wrote:
>
> >Have you thought about using LXC rather than OpenVZ.
>
> +1
>
> >There are
That sucks! What about KVM or XEN?
Nick.
--
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs:
http://www.asterisk.org/hell
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:45 -0500, Nick Khamis wrote:
> That sucks! What about KVM or XEN?
>
> Nick.
No problems here with XEN.
(Perhaps i should mention, that i use paravirtualsisation to get the
best performance.
Distro: mix of SLES11sp1 /open_11.4)
hw
--
___
Hans,
Thank you so much for your response. We will be moving everything to VM soon.
Cheers,
Nick.
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Hans Witvliet wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:45 -0500, Nick Khamis wrote:
>> That sucks! What about KVM or XEN?
>>
>> Nick.
>
> No problems here with XEN.
> (Per
Is anybody using pci-passthrough?
2011/11/9 Nick Khamis
> Hans,
>
> Thank you so much for your response. We will be moving everything to VM
> soon.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nick.
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Hans Witvliet
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:45 -0500, Nick Khamis wrote:
> >> Tha
Hahah... I was waiting on the sideline for this question.
Nick.
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Anton Kvashenkin
wrote:
> Is anybody using pci-passthrough?
>
> 2011/11/9 Nick Khamis
>>
>> Hans,
>>
>> Thank you so much for your response. We will be moving everything to VM
>> soon.
>>
>> Cheers,
On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 16:10 +0300, Anton Kvashenkin wrote:
> Is anybody using pci-passthrough?
>
Yes, though quite a while ago.
About three years ago, i used pci-passthrough to give a dom-U access to
a localy mounted smartcard.
But i have a vague feeling that you are up to something else...
I kno
Smart card? I think we should be leaning more towards the network devices?
Cheers,
Nick.
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Hans Witvliet wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 16:10 +0300, Anton Kvashenkin wrote:
>> Is anybody using pci-passthrough?
>>
> Yes, though quite a while ago.
> About three years
21 matches
Mail list logo
