Talk:Asterisk (PBX)

message: This article is starting to look like a Link Farm with all the external links at the bottom.  Wikipedia standards WP:EL state:
:"An article about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to that entity's official site, if there is one."
The other link information can be found on the official website, is redundant and should be removed. I suggest removal of all links other than official website or open an WP:RFC for discussion. Calltech 15:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I have cleaned up the links in the past but did not go as far to remove them all. BJTalk 18:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

text: External links removed and RfC opened, 14 November 2006. Calltech 14:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Until there are people disputing this on the talk page, I don't think an RfC is necessary. It is hard for us to express a "third opinion" when there are no second opinions being expressed. I think you should close the RfC until you have discussed it here more. If no one wants to dispute your removals, then go right ahead. Grouse 17:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Closed RfC. Calltech 18:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Recommend Removal Of Extraneous External Links

message: Two additional links were added that need discussion.  They both point to apparently the same new website that is under construction by Asterisk (AsteriskNow).  This site requires registration and login.  Also, the official website lists this site right upfront, which means the new links add nothing new and are therefore redundant.  Recommend removal of both. Calltech 13:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, I was the one to take the 'See also' and move it to 'Official website' to get it in the right place but forgot to remove the one from 'See also' (fixed). I think a tidbit and the link should be placed in 'Distributions' and removed from 'Official website' BJTalk 14:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Perhaps listing the site is a bit early since its in beta and under construction, but moving to Distributions makes sense.  Thanks for your contributions.  Calltech 17:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional Link Discussion

message: The criticism section really doesn't permit a balanced view to be presented.  It contains a very one-sided criticism of the architecture and licensing of Asterisk, without the counter viewpoint.  Given that it is, at best, opinion, not fact, it has no place in an encyclopedia entry. Corydon76 08:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I was going to revert your edit but the criticisms section cited no sources. I will try to find some sources and rebuild a smaller version of the section. BJTalk 09:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, what would be preferable would be to recategorize some of the criticisms into other sections, as long as the criticisms were each matched by the counter viewpoint, in order to maintain a NPOV.  For example, a section labelled Licensing might describe the dual license of Asterisk, while pointing out that others disagree with maintaining a dual license and either listing their reasons or linking to a page describing the arguments for and against dual licenses. Corydon76 09:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "NPOV" doesn't mean "state a counter for every argument". In this case, I think we need to write what's written elsewhere (with citations); Asterisk has dual license, Asterisk needs a timing source that the Digium boards can supply, and Asterisk's architecture doesn't allow plug-in modules. If specific people have argued specific things about these facts, that can be mentioned. But people need to have the facts, not conclusions drawn by the Wikipedia editors. --Alvestrand 10:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But "NPOV" requires that the mainstream viewpoint be given appropriate weight.  The problem with this section was that a minority viewpoint was presented, without presenting the mainstream viewpoint.  Finally, I'm not sure where you get the idea that Asterisk doesn't allow plug-in modules.  There are over 130 plugin modules in the base install and there is no limit imposed on how many additional modules may be loaded. Corydon76 15:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's how I interpreted the removed "criticisms" section, but I'm happy that I was wrong. --Alvestrand 21:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For one thing, Asterisk does not need the timing source from Digium cards.  It can use them or other brands of cards, it can use the timing source provided by their dummy driver (free) or if you are using Linux, the 2.4 kernel has the timing built in.  As far as the licence, How about stating the reason for the dual licence, instead of just outright denouncing it?  Something like "the commercial version includes commercial codecs that cannot be included in the opensource version".  Just stating what is written elsewhere doesn't make it NPOV; if I put on my own webpage that the Asterisk is the best thing ever and then cite it as a source, doesn't make it fact. --132.20.251.4 07:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recommend Removal Of Criticism section

message: I added a link to MozIAX, a Mozilla Firefox extension for Asterisk. That article is just a little stub and might can merge and redirect here. Anyway there it is. By the way, We have a new VoIP group at Wikiversity and are playing with Skype, MozIAX and other VoIP stuff. • Q^#o • 02:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if it might be better to link to the IAX2 entry and link MozIAX from there.  Certainly MozIAX would run with anything implementing the IAX2 protocol and is therefore not Asterisk-specific. Corydon76 05:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MozIAX 

message: Before making an edit, I'd like to disclose my bias and rationally dispute the assertion that "Asterisk, on its own, is not a complete system." I'm employed by Digium, the publisher, trademark-holder, and primary sponsor of Asterisk. The reasoning used on the page is that Asterisk must be configured to be complete. This applies to any modern software and should not suggest that Asterisk is incomplete. An Asterisk server may (not must) be equipped with telephony hardware to interface directly with a telephony service/device. A configuration frontend or GUI may (not must) be used, but the Asterisk configuration files are complete and sufficient for use of Asterisk. The suggestion that Asterisk alone is unusable or incomplete is put forth by organizations that build products that are based on (and must differentiate themselves from) Asterisk. Examples of such marketing statements are: here here and here. I propose that the first line and the two following bullet points of the Programming section be removed. Roderickm 19:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree with you from a technical POV, I strongly disagree that this article should be changed in it's current context (not to confuse with Asterisk DP context :)), all the article is saying is that devices and a DP has to be created to make Asterisk usefull. In fact Asterisk using make config just puts in sample files in the DP, and without configuring a device (be it SIP, IAX, sound card, or Zap) you can't use that. The article right now makes it clear for ordinary readers that Asterisk will NOT work unless they are ready for some caffeine, or will pay someone to do it for them. Which is why I think it is not misleading in any way and should stay.--Shmaltz 01:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and more. I was just reading this article for the first time a few days ago, and couldn't figure out how such a system would work. Sure, you can download and install Asterisk and configure it, but you need to connect it to physical phones to make it work like a real PBX, right? It took me quite a bit of research to figure out that you can by an interface card to connect up phones. Then I thought, sure, now you've got a PBX system with phones, but you need some way to call it from another phone by dialing a phone number. Then it took more research to figure out that you need to sign up for some sort of service. Perhaps what Asterisk is and what it does could be explained more effectively by explaining its relationship with the hardware and services that it's normally used with. I'm not asking for a how-to, which would be beyond the scope of Wikipedia, but simply a short prose description of the components of an Asterisk PBX system with a block diagram to help explain to those of us who have never worked with PBX equipment before. SOme of this would actually be more appropriate in other articles, but some of the details could surely be explained in this article. -- Schapel 01:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the asterisk handbook (draft?) has some diagram. Checking now.--Shmaltz 02:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Page 12 here.--Shmaltz 02:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complete System 

message: Can anyone tell me what the quotation marks in the opening paragraph are for? The sentence is as follows: ""Its name comes from the asterisk symbol, *, which in Unix (and Unix-like operating systems such as Linux) and DOS environments represents a wildcard, matching any sequence of characters in a filename."" Who is this quoting? Cheers, tim.bounceback 21:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotation marks

message: "[...]the other being a proprietary software license as to allow proprietary/closed and patented code, such as the G.729 codec to work with the system (although the G729 codec may work with the free or proprietary versions)."
contrary second expression in one sentence and wrong as fact: a license is no technical systems requirement.
:Who said it's a technical systems requirement? Can you explain exactly what is wrong with what you quote? As I have a hard time understanding what exactly you are trying to say.--Shmaltz 15:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Add citation needed, what GFDL violation? can show some pointers?--Shmaltz 15:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: It's not free software? So you telling me that I have to pay for the over 50 copies I have downloaded and are in actual production? Digium doesn't think so. It seems more that you suffer from something that makes you angery at Digium. The fact that maintainers decide what gets into it makes me have to pay?--Shmaltz 15:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Can you explain exactly what is untrue and misleading? You write: there're many otehre systems available Who is is talking about systems, this is about Asterisk, and asterisk needs some cards to connect to the PSTN.--Shmaltz 15:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Again you dose of to some mystical words writing non constructive critic and not explaining exactly what is wrong. If you think this paragraph should be removed then remove it, otherwise fix it.--Shmaltz 15:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: It's not a commercial article in any way, if you think it's written is such a way then please point out where and those can be fixed.--Shmaltz 15:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor Language Expression and Facts Errors

message: As near as I can tell, the article "IAXy" was hypothetically merged into "Digium", and then "Digium" was supposedly merged here... but it's some sort of interesting merge given that this article has absolutely no content about the IAXy and about half a sentence about Digium -- and still even contains a (now circular) link to Digium. Can't we call a delete a delete, guys? Andrew Rodland 22:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with you about IAXy - it was recommended that it be merged with IAX instead, and given the merge of Digium with Asterisk (PBX), that makes more sense.  The circular link has been fixed by Kgfleischmann. Calltech 14:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you relink IAXy to IAX, you should say a few word about it. IMHO a link to Comparison of VoIP software, Asterisk's build in softphone and IAXy could be noteworthy. --Kgfleischmann 17:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

text: This is all completely disgusting. IAXy, Asterisk (PBX), Digium, and IAX should all have distinct articles. There is zero reason to merge them, and plenty of reason to have the articles. I also don't see any discussion here about merging, probably because the merger knew his proposal would be soundly rejected with ridicule. AlbertCahalan 03:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The merger discussion was posted here for over a week.  Discussion took place on the IAXy and Digium talk pages.  Perhaps a little homework on your part would have been better before posting your uninformed comments above.   Calltech 07:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have revived the Digium article (with merged IAXy) and put a note on its talk page. I don't know if Digium should have articles but it shouldn't be merged anywhere. Products can get merged into companies pages easily with a section, this doesn't work the other way. If you disagree with my action taken please put Digium up for deletion but please don't merge it here. BJTalk 12:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is busted 

message: Hi, I'm a long time user of Wiki but this is my first contribution.  Sorry in advance if I am ignorant of the etiquette here.
I'm researching Asterisk and found this article the most useful of all information that I've gathered so far.  However, I feel it would be useful to expand on the hardware that is required and/or compatible with Asterisk.  The following sentence takes the reader right to the edge of what (for me) the missing piece of information is - the type of hardware required to actually use the Asterisk software:
"To attach ordinary telephones to a Linux server running Asterisk, or to connect to PSTN trunk lines, the server must be fitted with special hardware. (An ordinary modem will not suffice.)"
Could someone expand this a little perhaps?  I will have to research elsewhere - if I do figure out what the piece(s) of hardware are required to connect the software to a PSTN trunk line I will of course add to this article.
Thanks
Easyc (talk) 23:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is there in the same paragraph: Digium and a number of other firms sell PCI cards to attach telephones, telephone lines, T1 and E1 lines, and other analog and digital phone services to a server..--Shmaltz (talk) 03:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asterisk related hardware 

message: Asterisk is a PBX. AMIS is a protocol "between voice mail systems of different vendors". While asterisk has a builtin voicemail function, it is a PBX. Saying that AMIS is an "unimplemented feature" it's like saying that is doesn't do coffee.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Puthre (talk • contribs) 20:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Just took a look at AMIS-A.  It appears that it can be entirely implemented in dialplan.  There is no need for Asterisk to implement any direct method to support AMIS-A. Corydon76 (talk) 16:35, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not implementing AMIS? 

message: This article is typical of so many articles about software and technology on Wikipedia. It's written for the wrong audience. 
Jammed with jargon and in-group assumptions, it's targeted at readers of a hypothetical "Encyclopedia of Software Development" or some such thing. It is not written with the general encyclopedia user in mind. As an educated person, I shouldn't have to click on 50% of the terms used, read other similarly esoteric articles, and then come back. This is evidence to me that the article is targeted at a professional, not lay, audience.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.214.44.216 (talk) 02:41, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too specialized for an encyclopedia 

message: At the AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asterisk (PBX), this article was rightly criticized for currently relying on primary sources. I know little of this field, but managed to find some books about Asterisk that could be used to make a more solid article. I don't want to contribute to the linkfarm mentioned above, so will list them here for convenience:
* Asterisk For Dummies
* Configuration Guide for Asterisk PBX
* Asterisk: The Future of Telephony
* Asterisk 1.4 - the Professional's Guide
* Practical Asterisk 1.4 and 1.6: From Beginner to Expert
* Asterisk Hacking
* Asterisk Cookbook
The Asterisk: The Future of Telephony book is available as an online PDF here. --Mark viking (talk) 21:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources for the article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Asterisk (PBX). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160305004354/http://go.digium.com/zombie-proof-your-phone-system to http://go.digium.com/zombie-proof-your-phone-system
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:34, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I came to Wikipedia looking for an Asterisk version history.  It is a not uncommon feature on Wikipedia pages about free/open-source software projects.  A history at https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Asterisk+Versions goes back to 2005.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.83.113 (talk) 13:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommend a History section