FOOD FOR THOUGHT Asterisk on a router

[henry]

Hi everyone,-

I've had Asterisk (PIAF mostly) as my hobby for many years.
I think I installed and run each an every configuration Ward offered in his blog over the last few years.
CentOS, Ubuntu; on a server, NUC/Brix, as a VM, on RPi, on Cloud@Cost.
Running SIP, IAX, Unistim, SCCP with Avaya/Nortel/Cisco/soft phones...

Most of the installs didn't last but I have long had PIAF replace my landline (2 servers, 4 trunks)...

The computers get smaller but stay (relatively) fast. The routers get bigger and faster.
Those two were in different categories until very recently. But are not far apart (horsepower-wise) lately...

I know, there is Optware/Entware... Supporting asterisk11/asterisk18...
I tried them both: Optware on a Netgear and Entware on an Asus just recently...
When doing it on the Asus I noticed it has a Broadcom ~1GHz CPUs 256MB RAM and USB3 slot.
Pretty much what the RPi has... And the latter is capable of running PIAF...

So, my question is: is that a stupid idea (to hope) one day have Asterisk running on a high end router?
It would be the most logical place - a 24/7 running "computer...

After trying all Ward's versions, it is a real PITA to go back to editing conf files (Optware/Entware).
Even if you can install nano/mc/etc...

Any comments?

 

[dicko]

Given your experience , look at the Ubiquiti line, the Ub clues you that they run under Ubuntu, and with very little research you will have a root login on the buggers. They are also in my opinion a very competent router with all sorts of ancilliary devices that make them PDG. The otherway to go is to add a router/firewall to most anything, Smoothwall comes to mind.

 

[briankelly63]

You want to be running a solution on the most common hardware and most maintained and popular versions. There would be less security in such a solution and when there is a failure on a combo solution everything fails. Hardware is so cheap I don't see any advantage. Some tools are not going to run properly on edge soltions. These distributions, bugs and fixes are very dynamic so dealing with a large community of testers and users is a major advantage.

 

[henry]

I understand...
Making a box running Asterisk also be a router - instead of the other way around - is an alternative. Maybe even a better one.

But I learned to like the aftermarket firmware with the higher end routers DD-WRT, Tomato, Merlin...
DD on the Netgear serves as a RADIUS server(!) all by itself and t*f*t*p server (running on Optware).
Unlike the Nortel/Avaya phones (under SIP), the Ciscos 79xx always need a t*f*t*p server for bootup...

So, there are many small network-related duties that a router can perform just fine. On top of its main job.
And it is easier to maintain and run off battery power in case needed...

This was the reason I thought about assigning the telephony task to it as well.
I'm not looking at a commercial level installation. Under a dozen end points with 2 at most used at the same time...

I'd also like it run the two-factor authentication system for the household, but that's for another time...

 

[jerrm]

This was discussed earlier here: http://pbxinaflash.com/community/threads/piaf-on-a-router.17999

Without the FreePBX overhead, Entware-ng has what looks to be a pretty complete Asterisk11.

With Asus or similar ARM units, a FreePBX install is probably doable in a Debian chroot environment.

No interest in trying it myself. Unless it's a particularly interesting personal challenge for you, I doubt it's worth the headache or time when a complete Pi3 setup can be had for less than $60.00.

 

[henry]

...Entware-ng has what looks to be a pretty complete Asterisk11.

That's true. The convenience factor - I got spoiled with PIAF - is missing.
For example, adding channel drivers (SCCP, Unistim) is not as straightforward.

I doubt it's worth the headache or time when a complete Pi3 setup can be had for less than $60.00.

Exactly. It is a headache when you have to do it the "old way"... Even if you know it should work...

This is more of a philosophical question: best tool for a particular job or universal tools?
Do you run most services on just one box and loose them ALL when the box goes down?
Or do you specialize: pick the appropriate box for 1-2 services and run a bunch of them?

I don't think there is a simple answer to this...

 

[henry]

Talking about building your own router using generic hardware
http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2016/04/how-to-make-your-own-linux-router/

I'm hesitant to go this route because I already have 4 boxes there: cable modem, ASA-5505 and two routers for different WiFi flavours.
There is also a PoE switch somewhere in between to power the IP phones. First I had just two and they were running off of the ASA. Now I have six...

 

[GomezAddams]

No, just no.

This sort of thing comes up all the time on the pfsense (open source firewall). Somebody will ask if their favorite NAS/BitTorrent/Whatever server can be run along side pfsense, and they don't want to hear that the slight bit of convenience isn't worth the added complexity and the associated security problems.

My standard answer is use ESX or Hyper-V. Seriously. ESX is very little overhead, and it is free (and it has some other killer advantages as well). The only downside is that it doesn't like many non-intel NICs.

Hyper-V will run anywhere Windows will run, but it has a bit more overhead, and configuring it when you don't have a Windows domain is a royal PITA.

 

[henry]

...configuring [Hyper-V] when you don't have a Windows domain is a royal PITA.

Very true.
But the latest Hyper-V (2012) at this point is just as reliable as ESXi.
Hence, build-it-and-forget-it box should not be too high maintenance...