I'm happy with the server count as it fits nicely into our infastructure. This is more for allowing others to utilize the app we are working on. It seems slightly excessive to have a virtual machine dedicated to a single website - but in the end, it may make the most sense. For those that already have web hosting internally, they could always port it themselves.
At any rate, I'll wait a few days to see what other feedback I get and go from there. Thanks, Nathaniel ________________________________ From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of Philippe Laurent [...@ideos.com] Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 11:27 AM To: sipx-users Subject: Re: [sipx-users] php on sipxecs No doubt it would work fine, we've got some wicked (almost irresponsible) software combos on overworked Linux servers, but not for the more critical processes. Perhaps you should consider consolidation to two servers (keep SipX solo) instead of one. I would hate to have a security hole in my PHP code, or a badly written db query bring the box to a halt. Phones are considered one of those critical apps that, even in my highly virtualized infrastructure, sits on its own box, isolated. I wouldn't compromise the stability of a new PBX and strategy. Are there more servers that can be combined to offset the server count? How about virtualizing with ESXi (think low cost), and combine lots of your lower usage machines into virtual guests on one box? On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 1:32 AM, m...@grounded.net<mailto:m...@grounded.net> <m...@grounded.net<mailto:m...@grounded.net>> wrote: I'm not implying that it can't be done, it sure can be as there are other integrations on the box. I didn't know what you were after when I offered some input and as with anything, depends on how much overall resources the end result would consume to make it worth the effort or not. I'm sure others will chime up when they get the chance. On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 00:05:19 -0400, Nathaniel Watkins wrote: > I had a request to port the click to call app we've written so everything > could be ran on a single box - right now it's spread across 3 servers > (sipxecs/db/web - trying to consolidate). > > It is a group consensus that this isn't a good idea or would cause > instability? > > This message and any files transmitted with it are intended only for the > individual(s) or entity named. If you are not the intended individual(s) or > entity named you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, > distribution or reliance upon its contents is strictly prohibited. If you > have received this in error, please notify the sender, delete the original, > and destroy all copies. Email transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be > secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, > destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Garrett County > Government therefore does not accept any liability for any errors or > omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of email > transmission. > > > Garrett County Government, > 203 South Fourth Street, Courthouse, Oakland, Maryland 21550 > www.garrettcounty.org<http://www.garrettcounty.org> _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org<mailto:sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
