I’m currently developing an embedded RoIP gateway device. As it stands now, it’ll work with EchoLink or it can be used independently. It doesn’t run Linux and doesn’t have an SD card or anything, it’s just a dual-core Cortex M33 with an all new implementation written in C. One of the big attractions is that it draws less than a watt, and of course it doesn’t have any of the administration or security concerns of a Pi.
I’ve had a few people say that ASL is their main interest in linking these days, but from what I can tell there’s no distinction made between the network and the software package that implements it and I don’t see any other implementations out there.
I’ve only just started to dig into the technical feasibility. There’s no point in putting in hours of reading through code if the political climate makes it moot, though. One issue with any system that doesn’t have alternative implementations is that there’s generally no comprehensive list of technical standards to be met since the system is entirely homogeneous. That looks like it might be the case here, and I can understand if it’d be considered too much of a burden to try to produce such a standard, or to take a risk on permitting interoperability with a new implementation that doesn’t have exactly the same feature set.
So that’s my first question: Is ASL open to other implementations?
The answer might also depend on how ASL is defined. I know it can interoperate with EchoLink and other systems. Would it be more appropriate to define the new device not as a piece of ASL itself, but as a sort of peripheral to the system? I’m not after the ability to take a pile of my EchoBridge devices and set up an independent network that would also be AllStar, like you could with the Asterisk-based system. I’m just interested in producing low-power, easy-to-use devices that can take the place of a node based on a PC or SBC and participate in ASL.
Thanks and 73,