Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: SIP based Zimlet?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    9

    Default SIP based Zimlet?

    I see there is a "click to call" functionality from Skype and Asterisk.

    We use a sip based PBX (not Skype or Asterisk). Is the shipping Zimlet specific enough to need to be extended or "rewritten" for different standards based PBX's? Is the Zimlet specific to the user, the domain or is it a global setting for the server?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    San Mateo, CA
    Posts
    4,789
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    It works with Asterisk and that's all we've tried it with. It may work with other's but you'd need to test it. All the code is open source so it should be easy to make changes if you need to. The Zimlet has some user and some system settings.
    Looking for new beta users -> Co-Founder of Acompli. Previously worked at Zimbra (and Yahoo! & VMware) since 2005.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    9

    Default I have a sip based PBX ready, does anyone with 3.2 want to interactively test?

    I have a VOIP PBX (sip based) installed and available on the Internet. I was wondering if anyone has a Zimbra 3.2 (non-production, given the amount of issues I've seen in threads when enabling the zimlet) system and want to try? Am I the only person out here "not" using Asterisk?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grazman
    I have a VOIP PBX (sip based) installed and available on the Internet. I was wondering if anyone has a Zimbra 3.2 (non-production, given the amount of issues I've seen in threads when enabling the zimlet) system and want to try? Am I the only person out here "not" using Asterisk?
    No, you're not. Trying hard to avoid Asterisk... Mind telling us what you're using? I'm implementing sipX right now and am going to be looking at integrating this with Zimbra at some stage, but probably not this moment... Your experiences with something else would be useful to many of us, not just from an integrating-with-Zimbra perspective.

    Regards, Silas

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Also on sipxpbx here. Running 3.4 stable on fc4 and love the simplicity. Not an Asterisk fan though I know lots of folks are. I wanted a standards based system, and right now it's probably the better thought out system available (IMHO).

    See what we're doing with it so far, more to come when I have time to write it up.

    http://www.myitdepartment.net/index....d=18&Itemid=34

    Quote Originally Posted by skwdenyer
    No, you're not. Trying hard to avoid Asterisk... Mind telling us what you're using? I'm implementing sipX right now and am going to be looking at integrating this with Zimbra at some stage, but probably not this moment... Your experiences with something else would be useful to many of us, not just from an integrating-with-Zimbra perspective.

    Regards, Silas

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    81
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Just out of curiosity, why would anyone want to avoid asterisk?

    -n8

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by natrixgli
    Just out of curiosity, why would anyone want to avoid asterisk?

    -n8
    I suppose it depends on what your selling (upstairs I mean). Asterisk is not known for ease of configuration or adherence to standards (except maybe its own). The text files are cludgy, and you are constantly patching it, which is "un-pbx like".

    Not bashing Asterisk, just prefer standards based stuff instead of cludgy attempts to fits something into an existing architecture. I did a write up on sipXpbx after I gave up on Asterisk. I saw a lot of problems with the schema for my environment, and prefered to be able to use a redundant system like sipxpbx and found the more basic system a trouble free and easy to administer environment which I like.

    I personally don't feel there's anything "wrong" with Asterisk, unless you go beyond 8 or 9 handsets, then you're looking at multiple "what-if" scenarios dependent on the hardware and interface cards you've chosen. In my environment, a basic box running sipxpbx can scale easily to several hundred handsets, since the "pbx" is doing only one thing and the processing is distributed to the devices where the interface actually hands off.

    At the same time, you might dismiss this all as hogwash.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    81
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Hmmm.


    I think Asterisk conf files are easy to write, especially if you use macros. If you aren't the manual dialplan writing type, you can always let FreePBX do it for you.

    I like the fact that Asterisk covers most of the bases, and that it can be easily integrated with a number of different programs. It's usability seems so much more infinite than SipX.

    But hey, you say "lynuks" I say "lihnuks"... I see your points too. I've been thinking about splitting up Asterisk's duties among a few different boxes, but we'll see how comfortable it is on it's new home. (the mighty AMD X2 4600 with 2 GB DDR2)

    -n8
    Last edited by natrixgli; 08-22-2006 at 11:40 AM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    21
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Progress with SipX??

    Grazman, skwdenyer: Did either of you make any progress getting SipX to dial using a zimlet? We use SipX and are just starting to deploy Zimbra. We want our users to use the Zimbra web client instead of Outlook, but features drive everything. At this point it looks like it might be easier to get Outlook to dial instead of a zimlet. Any success stories before I check out the zimlet?

    Thanks,

    -Bob

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    21
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Silence is golden. . .

    Hm, I guess that means "no".

    Ah well, it's too bad sipX doesn't get more attention in the world.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-04-2010, 09:06 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-11-2008, 04:34 AM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-20-2007, 03:21 AM
  4. Domain Admin Error: Permission Denied
    By shanson in forum Administrators
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-29-2007, 05:48 AM
  5. Post instsallation problems
    By Assaf in forum Installation
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-29-2007, 10:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •