Interesting. But what would be the test criteria? Would it just be; It works/does not work? Would it have to support x features to be considered "“certified”? Would a voice/fax card be considered certified if the fax can’t be made to work, but everything else does?
It seems to me that we have abundant working hardware configurations, and that we would be better served by defining limits. Which is, I think, more important than “will this card work, or not?”.
A Pentium III with a lousy 8 gig hard drive can run a digium TDM22B card no problem. (I have one on my desk.)
But could it run a T1? A quad T1? Just two spans on a quad T1? Two spans if you’re building a meet-me conference bridge, but 4 spans if you’re building a calling card application? You’d have to push the configurations until the system crashes to truly know. And again, we get into permutations of config…
You’d need something decent to test the limits of the machines. Like a Hammer empirix.com and unfortunately, those are a bit pricy for my home, or even my office’s, lab…
However, it seems like something that those who build systems for a living would want to know. When a customer asks, “Can you build me an 123 sized system that can do XYZ?”, they should be able to give an intelligent qualified answer.
I doubt that any Asterisk@Home sized machine will ever suffer for power or capacity, but if Asterisk is going to progress into something that businesses can take seriously, someone will have to know the limits.