R.I.P. Kazoo

[krzykat]

Does anyone here have experience with Freeswitch / Monster-UI / Kazoo ??

I'm diving into it and trying to get a feel for it.

 

[caliam]

FWIW: The new hosted pbx by pbxHQ runs on Kazoo. I'm not advocating for them but you could get a good idea of how things run by opening up an account I suppose.

https://www.voip-info.org/forum/threads/pbxhq-special.24907/#post-151451

 

[krzykat]

FWIW: The new hosted pbx by pbxHQ runs on Kazoo.

Yes, I'm familiar with them. I've got a server running, trying to get more of a 1-1 relationship understanding for example how FreePBX/Asterisk operates vs FreeSwitch/Kazoo. Starting to understand it, but it is a completely different animal.

 

[pbxhq]

Yes, I'm familiar with them. I've got a server running, trying to get more of a 1-1 relationship understanding for example how FreePBX/Asterisk operates vs FreeSwitch/Kazoo. Starting to understand it, but it is a completely different animal.

I could answer better if you are more clear about what information you need.

While FreePBX/Asterisk and Kazoo can provide some similar functionality, they both excel at different things. Kazoo was built from the group-up to be a multi-tenant hosted pbx platform that can span across numerous datacenters and scale horizontally. While it could be used on a single machine for a single tenant, it would not be the best solution for that sort of setup. While FreePBX/Asterisk would really excel at that single tenant situation, it is not capable or designed to accommodate multiple tenants, or scale the way Kazoo can.

Kazoo can scale to millions of devices just be having the right hardware and configurations in place. And be completely redundant at the same time.

If you don't have a need for horizontal scaling and multi-tenancy, then Kazoo is overly complicated for your needs. Some tasks which can be accomplished easily with FreePBX/Asterisk are much more difficult in Kazoo, because everything had to be designed with horizontal scaling and redundancy in mind.

As well Kazoo is 100% API controlled. While Monster-UI does exist to have a web based UI, it is simply interacting with the backend via API. It makes Kazoo a very easy platform to develop on, when every single function it offers is manageable via API

 

[kenn10]

@krzykat I would opine that FusionPBX is the closest correlation between a GUI and Freeswitch compared to FreePBX and Asterisk. If multi-tenant is a requirement, VitalPBX is Asterisk-based and appears to handle multi-tenant pretty well.

Of course, FusionPBX is pretty much more of a money-driven operation. The software is free but if you need help, you won't find a helpful forum like you have here. They want you to pay for support.

 

[krzykat]

@krzykat I would opine that FusionPBX is the closest correlation between a GUI and Freeswitch compared to FreePBX and Asterisk. If multi-tenant is a requirement, VitalPBX is Asterisk-based and appears to handle multi-tenant pretty well.

Of course, FusionPBX is pretty much more of a money-driven operation. The software is free but if you need help, you won't find a helpful forum like you have here. They want you to pay for support.

The big issue for me with many of these is that I like 2 things we have from our environment here ... 1) you alluded to the helpful community that helps each other ... 2) Real Open source that allows you to hack and tweak as you like. ... I've installed and played with both FusionPBX and VitalPBX, and both are a bit lacking in that area. I had at one point setup FusionPBX to use as a failover for all the IncrediblePBX instances, but stopped doing it for some reason, I don't recall. But that would be a good first step to analyzing this. VitalPBX is nice, but its not a real multi-tenant and is hacked a bit with modifying the internal extension numbers and such. Also, if you have an issue or want a change, its not possible. If Fusion had the look and feel of VitalPBX, then I think you'd have something you'd really like. Kazoo has some really nice pieces, but I'm afraid they're going to start closing it up. I'm actually fearful of FreePBX doing the same as well.

 

[kenn10]

I'm actually fearful of FreePBX doing the same as well.

I agree with your comments but don't think FreePBX will move to closed source. It might get jettisoned by Sangoma but I think other open source people would fork it and keep it going. The problem with Freeswitch is that it has morphed into more of a "service provider" type of system than a PBX. Money has driven the development of the tools used to manipulate it and there hasn't been as much interest by the open source community compared to what we have with Asterisk.

What I'd like to see is what was going on with FreePBX at one point, and that is to make a FreePBX front-end for Freeswitch. Whomever started that project, let it die on the vine. Every time I try to dive into Freeswitch with one of the front-ends, I get frustrated at the lack of free or forum support and abandon it.

 

[krzykat]

I agree with your comments but don't think FreePBX will move to closed source. It might get jettisoned by Sangoma but I think other open source people would fork it and keep it going. The problem with Freeswitch is that it has morphed into more of a "service provider" type of system than a PBX. Money has driven the development of the tools used to manipulate it and there hasn't been as much interest by the open source community compared to what we have with Asterisk.

What I'd like to see is what was going on with FreePBX at one point, and that is to make a FreePBX front-end for Freeswitch. Whomever started that project, let it die on the vine. Every time I try to dive into Freeswitch with one of the front-ends, I get frustrated at the lack of free or forum support and abandon it.

Agree and Agreed. I know of people that would chip in for funding, but don't know of enough "right" people that have the chops to pull it off. I think its obvious that VitalPBX has some of the programming ability, but it shows that they have such a comfort level with Asterisk, that they haven't made that jump. Seems like a nice solution for them since they have their own front end now and it would get them away from their "quasi" multi-tenant and make it real. I just really want the ability to add to it. I've got a lot of things sketched out for how to get things looking good, but ... time time time.

 

[IDF SBA]

I think its obvious that VitalPBX has some of the programming ability... their "quasi" multi-tenant...

Hi,

Can you elaborate on this please?

why do you say it is not actually multi-tenant. It is one of the ones we are about to test...or maybe not...lol

 

[krzykat]

Hi,

Can you elaborate on this please?

why do you say it is not actually multi-tenant. It is one of the ones we are about to test...or maybe not...lol

In a true multi-tenant scenario, you would have TenantA with ext 103, and TenantB with ext 103. They would differentiate them by using a different FQDN or realm. With VitalPBX they say that you have extension 103 for both tenants, however, they really re-assign what 103 is and prefix it with the tenant ID. Therefore, when you register, you register with for example 101_103 for Tenant A and 102_103 for Tenant B. Now inside, they both use 103 and they adjust things to make them work, but they will really be different extension numbers.

 

[IDF SBA]

In a true multi-tenant scenario, you would have TenantA with ext 103, and TenantB with ext 103. They would differentiate them by using a different FQDN or realm. With VitalPBX they say that you have extension 103 for both tenants, however, they really re-assign what 103 is and prefix it with the tenant ID. Therefore, when you register, you register with for example 101_103 for Tenant A and 102_103 for Tenant B. Now inside, they both use 103 and they adjust things to make them work, but they will really be different extension numbers.

Ouch!

So it's not really creating separate instances it's still just the regular system taking on a bigger load.

Thats not worth the upgrade price then!!!

Thanks for the heads up

 

[krzykat]

Ouch!

So it's not really creating separate instances it's still just the regular system taking on a bigger load.

Thats not worth the upgrade price then!!!

Thanks for the heads up

From a management point of view, it does make it easier to have one server to manage. You also only need one computer instead of multiple instances, but Yes, of course, you could encounter requirements for more RAM, Disk, CPU, etc. It's not bad, I'm only saying it is NOT true multi-tenant.

 

[IDF SBA]

I'm only saying it is NOT true multi-tenant.

Do you know what IS true multi-tenant?

 

[krzykat]

Do you know what IS true multi-tenant?

I think I would check out Kazoo and Fusion PBX

 

[IDF SBA]

I think I would check out Kazoo and Fusion PBX

will check on kazoo

as I understand Fusion is great...except its support and future is centered around a single point of failure (a micromanaging individual) - I'd rather not do that.

 

[billsimon]

FusionPBX is free and open source. There is a community at pbxforums.com.

 

[IDF SBA]

FusionPBX is free and open source. There is a community at pbxforums.com.

I was told by other MSPs that support requires payment and the software is handled by one individual who is overloaded and does not delegate or share. (which is a problem should anything occur with him - I tend to avoid one-man bands for various reasons)

 

[kenn10]

There is a community at pbxforums.com

Yes there is but it isn't exactly jumping with activity. Many user questions seem to go unanswered.

 

[IDF SBA]

Yes there is but it isn't exactly jumping with activity. Many user questions seem to go unanswered.

I was told that is due to the owner of fusionpbx who doesn't want support to be offered separate from the official paid support

 

[kenn10]

If you are a service provider, its a lot easier to have multiple cloud instances or rent space in a data center and create VPS's of your own. IncrediblePBX is a known quantity with good support via the forums. It is easily mass-produced to multiple instances of VPS. At $3-$5/month for reliable cloud instances, I wouldn't waste my time on multi-tenant unless you're like a Ring Central or Avaya or Cisco.