Re: [PATCH 0/5] isdn: deprecate non-mISDN drivers
Jorge Bastos <[email protected]> Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:36:28 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.isdn.i4l.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--===============6326788320387501524== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_bdd6e12aa815165fe7383a904d12ea6f" --=_bdd6e12aa815165fe7383a904d12ea6f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Mihai, ISDN won't die in the next 20 years, will decrease the usage yes, but won't die. Mainly because operators, have no idea why, won't provide direct IP Trunk's (they're dumb) to the clients, but will have IP Trunking in a TA that'll provide ISDN ports to the client. I've been porting some clients to direct IP Trunk's, but, the operators that offer IP Trunk's here, make it cost about 80% more than direct IP Trunk's. My 2 cents on ISDN, (also, many people STILL think a copper line for ISDN works better, and they're not wrong) On 2019-04-24 23:21, Mihai Moldovan wrote: > * On 4/24/19 4:47 PM, Birger Harzenetter wrote: It turns out that the suggestion from Karsten Keil wa to remove I4L > in 2018 after the last public ISDN networks are shut down. This has > happened now (with a very small number of exceptions), so I guess it's > time to try again. > It has happened? In which marketing department? > Maybe it's no longer of relevance to residential customers. > But for business customers it's quite a different story. > Most of then still use ISDN lines. From the palces I visit, I'd say maybe a > quarter of them have gone VoIP so far. So no sign of an end there. To be fair, DTAG cancelled my ISDN line back in 2017, even though it was a business contract. SOHO only, no PTP, but still. mISDN + LCR work pretty badly in NT mode, including locking up often, not releasing B channels correctly, having a weird echo etc. in my setup. I'm mostly forced to use VoIP directly through my asterisk setup when making calls every once in a fortnight. mISDN + CAPI emulation in user space is even worse in NT mode; essentially useless. I'm misty on the details, though, as to whether the user space CAPI emulation also needs CAPI kernel support. Then again, my old and battered Asterisk 11 version also looses connectivity to the DTAG SIP peer relatively often these days, which only a restart can temporarily fix, so the whole setup is wonky at best. > Indeed, after I posted that pach recently the question has come up again: > How amy versions of mISDN do actually exist? > Who maintains them? And where? > Is there any coordination going on? > Does anyone actually even care? I *think* that there only two. Karstens main repository (which has seen a few unexpected disruptions and an unannounced move from his own git infrastructure to a GitHub account, as far as I was able to gather) and the in-kernel implementation which is supposed to be synced up every once in a while, when it's deemed stable. Historically, his repository also contained a few experimental branches, so I guess you could count them as different versions. Most of them are stale, though, and didn't even make the GitHub transition. Mihai _______________________________________________ isdn4linux mailing list [email protected] https://www.isdn4linux.de/mailman/listinfo/isdn4linux --=_bdd6e12aa815165fe7383a904d12ea6f Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 <html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset= =3DUTF-8" /></head><body style=3D'font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana,Gen= eva,sans-serif'> <p>Mihai,</p> <p>ISDN won't die in the next 20 years, will decrease the usage yes, but wo= n't die.<br />Mainly because operators, have no idea why, won't provide dir= ect IP Trunk's (they're dumb) to the clients, but will have IP Trunking in = a TA that'll provide ISDN ports to the client.</p> <p>I've been porting some clients to direct IP Trunk's, but, the operators = that offer IP Trunk's here, make it cost about 80% more than direct IP Trun= k's.</p> <p>My 2 cents on ISDN, (also, many people STILL think a copper line for ISD= N works better, and they're not wrong)</p> <p>On 2019-04-24 23:21, Mihai Moldovan wrote:</p> <blockquote type=3D"cite" style=3D"padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2= px solid; margin: 0"><!-- html ignored --><!-- head ignored --><!-- meta ig= nored --> <div class=3D"pre" style=3D"margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace">= * On 4/24/19 4:47 PM, Birger Harzenetter wrote: <blockquote type=3D"cite" style=3D"padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2= px solid; margin: 0"> <blockquote type=3D"cite" style=3D"padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2= px solid; margin: 0">It turns out that the suggestion from Karsten Keil wa = to remove I4L<br /> in 2018 after the last public ISDN networks are shut do= wn. This has<br /> happened now (with a very small number of exceptions), s= o I guess it's<br /> time to try again.</blockquote> <br /> It has happened? In which marketing department?<br /> Maybe it's no = longer of relevance to residential customers.<br /> But for business custom= ers it's quite a different story.<br /> Most of then still use ISDN lines= =2E From the palces I visit, I'd say maybe a<br /> quarter of them have gon= e VoIP so far. So no sign of an end there.</blockquote> <br /> To be fair, DTAG cancelled my ISDN line back in 2017, even though it= was a<br /> business contract. SOHO only, no PTP, but still.<br /> <br /> = mISDN + LCR work pretty badly in NT mode, including locking up often, not<b= r /> releasing B channels correctly, having a weird echo etc. in my setup= =2E I'm mostly<br /> forced to use VoIP directly through my asterisk setup = when making calls every<br /> once in a fortnight.<br /> <br /> mISDN + CAP= I emulation in user space is even worse in NT mode; essentially<br /> usele= ss. I'm misty on the details, though, as to whether the user space CAPI<br = /> emulation also needs CAPI kernel support.<br /> <br /> Then again, my ol= d and battered Asterisk 11 version also looses connectivity to<br /> the DT= AG SIP peer relatively often these days, which only a restart can<br /> tem= porarily fix, so the whole setup is wonky at best.<br /> <br /> <br /> <blockquote type=3D"cite" style=3D"padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2= px solid; margin: 0">Indeed, after I posted that pach recently the question= has come up again:<br /> How amy versions of mISDN do actually exist?<br /= > Who maintains them? And where?<br /> Is there any coordination going on?<= br /> Does anyone actually even care?</blockquote> <br /> I *think* that there only two. Karstens main repository (which has s= een a few<br /> unexpected disruptions and an unannounced move from his own= git infrastructure<br /> to a GitHub account, as far as I was able to gath= er) and the in-kernel<br /> implementation which is supposed to be synced u= p every once in a while, when<br /> it's deemed stable. Historically, his r= epository also contained a few<br /> experimental branches, so I guess you = could count them as different versions.<br /> Most of them are stale, thoug= h, and didn't even make the GitHub transition.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> M= ihai<br /> </div> <br /> <div class=3D"pre" style=3D"margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace">= _______________________________________________<br /> isdn4linux mailing li= st<br /> <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">isdn4linux@li= stserv.isdn4linux.de</a><br /> <a href=3D"https://www.isdn4linux.de/mailman= /listinfo/isdn4linux" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noopener noreferrer">https:/= /www.isdn4linux.de/mailman/listinfo/isdn4linux</a></div> </blockquote> <p><br /></p> </body></html> --=_bdd6e12aa815165fe7383a904d12ea6f-- --===============6326788320387501524== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ isdn4linux mailing list [email protected] https://www.isdn4linux.de/mailman/listinfo/isdn4linux --===============6326788320387501524==--