Hi, Maxim!

Good news, I am glad you are interested in these features. I will fork the project in our organization and push the requests there so you can revise them before merging them. We currently have them implemented for 1.2 - shall we adapt the changes for the master branch?

Best regards,

Razvan Crainea
OpenSIPS Core Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com

On 06/20/2014 11:45 PM, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
Hey Bogdan, thanks for sharing your ideas for us. In fact all of those
items that you have listed are already on drawing board for the next 2-3
months development here:

   - 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

I am particularly interested in the timeout notifications and cache for
playing files, so maybe you can start with forking out main branch in
the github and pushing your patches there? For playing cache, I have
been planning to use mmap() and refcounting, so I am particularly
curious which path did you take. We need this in order so that we can
use rtpproxy to generate test streams for other rtpproxy, or maybe even
to itself. I have started some automated regression testing suite here
we will be pushing it our pretty soon.




On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 2:22 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
<bog...@opensips.org <mailto:bog...@opensips.org>> wrote:

    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






--
Maksym Sobolyev
Sippy Software, Inc.
Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts
Tel (Canada): +1-778-783-0474
Tel (Toll-Free): +1-855-747-7779
Fax: +1-866-857-6942
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