2 okt 2013 kl. 17:29 skrev Jorj Bauer :
> It seems to me that this would be more flexible and useful if, instead of
> using rtpproxy to provide audio, it specified a URI for early media and send
> out appropriate UPDATEs. Using rtpproxy feels like an unnecessary hack
> (albeit one that simplif
2 okt 2013 kl. 17:19 skrev Robert Boisvert :
> All,
>
> These are good comments and very helpful. In response, …
>
> The naming decision came up early in the design process and I concluded that
> queue is too generic. I thought of “callqueue” but decided against it since
> there are many wa
I am sure there are dozen of alternatives and eventual improvements. For
this discussion now, I would like to focus on finishing the import of
current module, in preparation to freeze for v4.1.
In the future people can came with new code to it and if people want to
discuss about that now, mayb
Jorj Bauer writes:
> It seems to me that this would be more flexible and useful if, instead
> of using rtpproxy to provide audio, it specified a URI for early media
> and send out appropriate UPDATEs. Using rtpproxy feels like an
> unnecessary hack (albeit one that simplifies the signaling).
it i
It seems to me that this would be more flexible and useful if, instead of using
rtpproxy to provide audio, it specified a URI for early media and send out
appropriate UPDATEs. Using rtpproxy feels like an unnecessary hack (albeit one
that simplifies the signaling).
- Jorj
On Oct 2, 2013, at 1
All,
These are good comments and very helpful. In response, …
The naming decision came up early in the design process and I concluded
that queue is too generic. I thought of “callqueue” but decided against it
since there are many ways to put calls into queues and I didn’t want to
conflict with
2 okt 2013 kl. 16:01 skrev Daniel-Constantin Mierla :
>
> On 10/2/13 3:54 PM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
>> A few comments:
>>
>> I think the module name should be "queue". The moh-part is a just a nice way
>> of handling the queue...
> I don't like "queue" alone, because it is not suggestive fo
On 10/2/13 3:54 PM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
A few comments:
I think the module name should be "queue". The moh-part is a just a nice way of
handling the queue...
I don't like "queue" alone, because it is not suggestive for the
functionality. It can be callqueue or something else that contain
A few comments:
I think the module name should be "queue". The moh-part is a just a nice way of
handling the queue...
From reading the docs:
- The example on 3.4. moh_maxcalls illustrates usage of mohdir.
- Change "from the main (request) route" to "a request route". Routes can call
routes.
