[App_rpt-users] IPV6 and upgrades --was: toy throwing time?

Wed Sep 14 05:22:01 UTC 2016

Wow,
Ok.  There are some good points here, but what we seem to be hitting is 
one of the major criticisms of ham radio -- any new ideas are met with 
stiff resistance.  Which usually means another fork in the road and the 
community is further divided.  Which is quite funny, since ham radio 
operators are normally credited with making the advances that everyone 
else adopts later.

Nobody is forcing you to pay attention to this, I'm just some hobbyist 
who had an idea and is trying to give back to the community.  Note that 
I did most of the work on this back in October, almost a year ago, and 
afterwards it has sat.  I posted about this before, and am doing so 
again since I see there is some interest.

1.8 does need some minor tweaks to the extensions.conf file generated by 
the portal to get running.  I will try to include the extensions.conf 
file from my test node, 42088, in the repository for an example.  There 
were just some minor tweaks that were needed to get the portal generated 
file accepted.

As for running NAT, why?  One of the points of moving to IPv6 is to get 
away from using NAT.

For building the system, I just put on the repository for this port some 
simple instructions on the wiki that are needed if you try to run 
./configure and make.  This assumes that you have all the prerequisites 
for building asterisk in the first place.   You will also need to 
compile and install the patched version of DAHDI as well before 
compiling and running asterisk.

In addition to the features that were added to 1.8, there are some 
pretty significant changes to the code base itself.  Trying to port the 
stuff for supporting IPv6 into 1.4 would be more trouble than it is worth.

Richard,
Welcome to the community.  Don't be discouraged by what you are seeing.

I invite you to take a look at the code for 1.8.32.3 that I have up on 
the github repository, poke around in it, and make contributions back.  
I would love to see this become stable enough for a production 
environment so that we could then ask for it to be blessed.

Just my $.04 cents. :)

-Stacy
KG7QIN

On 09/13/2016 09:39 PM, Richard Bateman wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm going to toss my $0.02 in as well and see if it gets me kicked out 
> onto my backside =]
>
> I am a developer with a lot of experience with open source software 
> projects, as well as being a ham radio operator and one of the newest 
> members of this group.  I'm very interested in the possibilities that 
> are presented here, but having come from an open source background I 
> have to say that my #1 frustration is that there seems to be no effort 
> to set things up so that people can easily get involved with the code.
>
> Personally I'd be very interested in contributing code; I'd like to 
> think that I could fix some things that are bothering me and maybe 
> that'd help others as well. Naturally the first thing I did was start 
> looking for the codebase and figuring out how to build it.
>
> I still haven't figured out for sure how to build the distribution; 
> that seems to happen under a dark rock somewhere.  There are no DIY 
> instructions that I can find.  I recently discovered that there is at 
> least one semi-major (ARM-specific) fork of the project which is even 
> worse in this way than this project is and the documentation for both 
> is scattered across the internet and intermixed; I had no idea that 
> half of the documentation I was reading from the hamvoip.org 
> <http://hamvoip.org> group may or may not be relevant to what I'm 
> doing because there isn't really an easy to find single source of any 
> kind of truth or attempt by either group to clarify things.
>
> I realize that I'm a total newcomer walking in and saying "hey you 
> should do this differently", and I absolutely am grateful to 
> everything that has been done, but... subversion? on a closed server? 
> And your documentation site is split from an old drupal site and a new 
> site that I can't find half the time? This feels like it's designed to 
> keep out new developers rather than bring them in.
>
> That is of course an overly harsh characterization, but there are 
> *lots* of open source projects out there these days and since this 
> project was created much better collaboration tools have been created.
>
> Here is what I'd really love to see:
>
> (note that this advice is provided free of charge and guaranteed to be 
> worth what you paid)
>
> 1. Move the main code repository to github.  If you have devs who 
> don't want to learn how to use git, a) I'm happy to get on the phone 
> with them and walk them through whatever is annoying them and b) 
> github actually supports checking out the master branch via 
> subversion, so you can still use it if you really really want to.
>
> 2. Use github wiki for documentation; this way users can submit pull 
> requests to provide documentation on using the code, tips and tricks, etc.
>
> 3. Use the github issue system -- I realize that's going to be a pain 
> sometimes, but at least it would provide a place where issues can be 
> filed, answered, and *searched* -- that last is the most important 
> since it means future people with the same issue can find the result.
>
> I can only imagine that the core developers of the project are getting 
> tired of carrying it on their backs for all this time; whether we 
> upgrade to 1.8 or stay with 1.4 or jump straight to 1.13 can we 
> *please* get this set up somewhere that it's easy to get into and 
> contribute? I can't imagine that I'm the only newcomer feeling this 
> frustation -- I'm probably just one of the few who are annoying enough 
> to write you an email about it.
>
> Thank you to all who work on this. I am absolutely ready and willing 
> to help with migration if any of these suggestions (or alternatives to 
> them) are to be implemented.
>
> Respectfully,
> Richard Bateman a.k.a. taxilian
> KD7BBC
> HamStudy.org <http://hamstudy.org>
>
>> On Sep 13, 2016, at 10:21 PM, David McGough <kb4fxc at inttek.net 
>> <mailto:kb4fxc at inttek.net>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> Every time these discussions about upgrading software come up, I
>> re-evaluate the possible gains of a major upgrade.
>>
>> I'll remind everyone of a major hurdle which can't be side-stepped: The
>> AllStar project would continue to be a FORK of Asterisk---not code that
>> becomes part of the Digium distro, like it once was.  You ask why?? Well,
>> that's due to Digium's draconian contributor license, which doesn't
>> guarantee the code will remain open source and all developer's must
>> surrender their code ownership to Digium, to do with as they please.
>>
>> So, I guess my question becomes: WHY? ...what glaring issues will a major
>> upgrade resolve?  What issues need to be fixed? What -TRULY- known
>> problems are present? Why not just FIX those problems, including
>> back-porting code, if Asterisk needs a patch.
>>
>> As the overall Asterisk project has marched forward, gazillions of
>> features have been added...And gazillions of NEW bugs.  Are those 
>> features
>> needed for AllStar? For the most part, I would argue probably not.
>> AllStar's primary duty isn't as a phone PBX...
>>
>> One aspect many AllStar users are probably unaware of is that there were
>> major command syntax changes as of Asterisk 1.6.x...One thing this means
>> to the user is that the dialplan syntax in the 1.4.x extensions.conf file
>> isn't compatible with syntax in 1.6.x and later...So, now both styles of
>> dialplans must be supported, the old 1.4.x variety and the new 1.6.x
>> style. Yet more confusion.
>>
>> As for IPV6, yes, native IPV6 compatibility would be nice, but simply NAT
>> mapping IPV6 address space to IPV4 addresses will and does work too. But,
>> this is only part of the problem, it doesn't fix other major issues: All
>> the AllStar registration and node database software must be upgraded to
>> IPV6 as well! THEN, suddenly, none of the IPV6 users can talk to IPV4
>> users---and, yes, there will be IPV4 address space in use by ISP's for
>> years to come. The IPV4 vs. IPV6 migration problem gets more and more
>> complex to fix, the deeper you dig.
>>
>> ....As another long term solution, the IPV6 code could be back-ported to
>> the 1.4.x chan_iax2, chan_sip.  Wouldn't this be easier than a full
>> upgrade??
>>
>> Anyhow, as a recap, what is broken that needs to be fixed???? IMO, fixing
>> core issues in the CURRENT codebase is much better use of developer's
>> time, since developers are so few and far between.
>>
>>
>> Just my $0.02
>>
>> 73, David KB4FXC
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2016, Stacy wrote:
>>
>>> That is true, 1.8 does support IPv6.  Some places are already starting
>>> to offer you only an IPv6 address with a connection. Mostly mobile hot
>>> spots.
>>>
>>> If we don't want Allstar to become something of the past, we should 
>>> move
>>> up to at least 1.8 so that it supports IPv6.
>>>
>>> This code really needs someone else's eyes to go over it, it works 
>>> but I
>>> know there are things that need to be fixed.
>>>
>>>
>>> -Stacy
>>>
>>> KG7QIN
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> App_rpt-users mailing list
>> App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org <mailto:App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org>
>> http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this list please visit 
>> http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users and scroll 
>> down to the bottom of the page. Enter your email address and press 
>> the "Unsubscribe or edit options button"
>> You do not need a password to unsubscribe, you can do it via email 
>> confirmation. If you have trouble unsubscribing, please send a 
>> message to the list detailing the problem.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> App_rpt-users mailing list
> App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
> http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
>
> To unsubscribe from this list please visit http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users and scroll down to the bottom of the page. Enter your email address and press the "Unsubscribe or edit options button"
> You do not need a password to unsubscribe, you can do it via email confirmation. If you have trouble unsubscribing, please send a message to the list detailing the problem.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.keekles.org/pipermail/app_rpt-users/attachments/20160913/a1895222/attachment.html>