Hello Maxim, Hello Jev,

Sorry for taking so long to answer to these emails.

I'm really glad to find out that the rtpproxy project is actually moving along and even more, evolving - it is a critical component in our platforms (and for most OpenSIPS deployments) and we got a bit concerned about what is going on with rtpp. To be honest, we had on the table the possibility to fork it and continue by ourselves - but I do not want to re-invent the wheel or to pollute the environment with yet another relay relaying tool (anyhow, there is this rtpengine stuff popping around lately )

We will be more than happy to get involved - as ideas, experience and work - in the rtpproxy evolution ; of course, if you guys are willing to accept it :). One again , rtpproxy is too important to us to stay neutral and lately there are more and more features touching both SIP and RTP ....so there is a strong need for a better integration between OpenSIPS and RTPProxy, IMHO.

Now, technically speaking, the kind of problems we mainly faced are (a) scaling with HW (especially with the old single threaded model), (b) redundancy and (c) controlling streams (multiple streams audio/video in the same SIP session, on-hold, etc).

What we did (and have as patches):
- Send timeout notifications to different OpenSIPS servers (more than one) - Different timeout values for early media and established calls (longer for early, shorter for established)
  - Play music on hold in early media state
  - Detect on-hold and disable timeouts (search different solution here)
- Do not send media timeout if other sessions are active (video and audio)
  - In bridge mode asymmetric should not be always assumed
  - Cache played files instead of reading them from the disk all the time


Also we are looking into new features (things that we can work together) :
  - better structuring between sessions and streams
  - Send timeout notifications over UDP
  - Force specific ports in reply, if possible
  - Failover support
  - Provide statistics per session (even ended) back to OpenSIPS
  - Restart persistent
  - Change learning period (possibly linked with on-hold media disable)
  - ICE support
  - SRTP to RTP conversion

Definitly we can look into transcoding part too - what we did is for Sangoma cards (so HW transcoding, not SW).



So, we will look into the new work you guys did on rtpproxy - to have a starting point for the future planning. After that, if you agree on having us contributing to the rtpproxy, we can get involved in planning and actual development.

Best regards,

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com

On 20.06.2014 02:16, Jev Björsell wrote:
Hi Guys,

Some updates on the rtpproxy project;

We have now moved the rtpproxy project from sourceforge to github http://github.com/sippy/rtpproxy

This change should make the project more visibility & and transparency. Please feel free to create Issues for feature requests and bugs, and of course Pull Requests are appreciated! :)

We have also moved the mailing list over to Google Groups: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/rtpproxy <https://groups.google.com/forum/#%21forum/rtpproxy>

We will do a maintenance release - version 1.3, and Max is busy working on a 2.0 release, which has some significant improvements to jitter characteristics, and performance.

Best Regards,
-Jev



On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Maxim Sobolev <sobo...@sippysoft.com <mailto:sobo...@sippysoft.com>> wrote:

    Hey Bogdan, sorry for missing your message. The mail traffic these
    days is insane, so it's hard to keep atop of all issues.

    We are working behind the scene on what would become rtpproxy 2.0,
    the code is pretty stable and we have it deployed in like 30-40
    places. The main changes are in the timing loop, which improves
    the jitter significantly and recently we've also split UDP sending
    code into its own thread(s). That code is available here:
    https://bitbucket.org/sippysoft/rtpproxy. It's only tested to
    compile on FreeBSD, but it should not be difficult to compile it
    on Linux. This basically pushes it to the limits of what's
    possible to achieve with the standard POSIX facilities. We've been
    able to push 16-core machine up to 400KPPS in and 400KPPS out with
    it, all the way up to 90% CPU, while the older version started
    choking at about 30%. Our plan is to tie few loose ends and push
    it out to the official repo as a basis for 2.0.

    Beyond 2.0, there is another project in progress that is using
    novel netmap framework to overcome performance issues of the
    traditional kernel-based socket API. This potentially would allow
    us to increase capacity at least 5 times on the comparable
    hardware. The framework itself is pretty low-level, so I am
    working on a library that would allow it to be more easily
    integrated into an app. The WiP code is here.
    https://bitbucket.org/sobomax/libsinet.

    Another direction that we are going to explore is to add
    transcoding support. We have 2 cards in our lab now and setting up
    the devtesting system just today. I've heard that you have done
    some work in this direction, so if you want to share something
    with us, we would be very interested to look at those patches.

    On the open-source side we plan to move the project into some
    modern project management facility, the favorite being github. My
    colleague Jev is driving this change.

    In general I don't mind giving you or anyone else from the
    OpenSIPS team read-write access to repository if you feel like
    integrating some of your patches.


    On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 5:03 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
    <bog...@opensips.org <mailto:bog...@opensips.org>> wrote:

        Hello Maxim,

        Long time, no talks, but I hope everything is fine on your side.

        I'm reaching you in order to ask about your future plans in
        regards to the rtpproxy project? We see no much activity
        around it and other media relays are popping around.

        RTPP is an essential component for us, we invested a lot of
        work, we have many patches (extensions) for it (which we want
        to push to the public tree, but there is no answer on this)
        and we are also looking for investing a lot into big future
        plans (as adding more functionalities).

        Now, my question is - what is your commitment and
        disponibility for the RTPP project ? depending on that we what
        to re-position ourselves, as we do not want to waste time and
        work on things which are out of control.

        Best regards,

-- Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
        OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
        http://www.opensips-solutions.com




-- Maksym Sobolyev
    Sippy Software, Inc.
    Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts
    Tel (Canada): +1-778-783-0474 <tel:%2B1-778-783-0474>
    Tel (Toll-Free): +1-855-747-7779 <tel:%2B1-855-747-7779>
    Fax: +1-866-857-6942 <tel:%2B1-866-857-6942>
    Web: http://www.sippysoft.com
    MSN: sa...@sippysoft.com <mailto:sa...@sippysoft.com>
    Skype: SippySoft



_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to