[Klug-general] Asterisk - good or bad?

Peter Childs PChilds at bcs.org.uk
Wed Sep 9 06:46:53 UTC 2009

2009/9/8 George Prowse <george.prowse at gmail.com>:
> Peter Childs wrote:
>> 2009/9/8 Paul Littlefield <paul.littlefield at bigfoot.com>:
>>> Marvellous, thank you for all your replies...
>>> ...especially the "bitch" line Julia, I love a challenge ;-)
>> I tend to agree with everyone else,
>> The main problem which is why its back on on the Great idea pile, was
>> that I wanted to use it behind a double NAT(ed) office, (Yes you heard
>> that right two routers, Which if you then want to run VoIP is a no no.
>> My current though it that if someone were to get IPv6 working properly
>> VoIP might suddenly be usable by normal people. But until then I guess
>> its Skype, Skype or Skype
>> Peter.
> Asterisk supports ipv6: http://www.asteriskv6.org/

Found that my-self.... Its very new and not ideal given that IPv6
currently needs tunneling to get out your own building. But VoIP is
one of the main areas where IPv6 is a must for the future.

I've been looking at Asterisks for a while, and think it would solve
very nicely one of the main problems on my desk at the moment (this
new phone system we got thats don't work and does not do even some of
the features out 20 year old pots based system did)

The stumbling blocks I've got are,

1> The difficulty with even getting it configured for demonstration
that it could work, and find hardware for that demonstration.
2> The Office Firewall, and Internet Equipment. (Which I'll expand to
another thread I think, I need some advise on it)
3> Finding the time and getting people to believe that this really is
the best way forward.

> _______________________________________________
> Kent mailing list
> Kent at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/kent

More information about the Kent mailing list