I assume the goal here is to develop a carrier grade soft-switch. I understand features are great but features would cost us. As we add features the stability would degrade. I agree that adding C# support is an intresting idea but do we really need it adding mono into FreeSwitch I understand its a great thing for C# developers but mono is not super-stable. I personal opinion is to work towards defining a minimum set of features that are absolutely critical and then making those features stable and relatively bug free. In Freeswitch much of the features or protocol support is based on external libraries this can be a good thing and a bad thing too. Since each of those libraries would probably have bugs and that means making sure that those libraries are also actively maintained. -- Vikram Rangnekar