Re: [on-asterisk] Back to Bell for me ...
Michael: I can relate to the not being Wife-Friendly issue... trust me.. about three years ago, I've burnt a lot of money behind hardware, which could have been spent behind nice romantic dinners and movies. Wife was definitely not happy at the time, but now that she can keep in touch with relatives and friends for almost next to nothing, and having the ability to get a hold of me just by punching in 1000 on our home phone whether I am at clients, out of town, or just bumming around at a hardware store -- gives her a sense of power and control. Ok... so she has me by the leash !!! All I have to say is don't give up.The time and energy spent is absolutely worth it! The experience gathered is next to none... and the benefits of actually being able to control the flow of your calls is priceless. It has been almost 3 years, we've converted 100% to voip, for both home and office. It has been 2+ years we have completely converted to Asterisk. Cheers! Reza. - Original Message - From: Michael Bryenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: asterisk@uc.org Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 9:47 PM Subject: [on-asterisk] Back to Bell for me ... I have a D-Link DI-102 and a Linksys SPA3102 to part with. My experimentation with Trixbox was not Wife-Friendly(c). Bought about 2 months ago - like new. Let me know if you are interested. Mike - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [on-asterisk] Back to Bell for me ...
Yes, the wife acceptance factor cannot be over emphasized - I had a bumpy couple of months. Instead of going whole hog asterisk with no looking back (which, of course, is what I wanted to do), I installed trixbox in parallel with all the house phones first. So the phones behaved as 'normal.'. Then I started the configuration, testing, breaking things, more testing, and the only extension interrupted was the one old handset physically next to the trixbox. But once I showed my wife that we could cancel our bundled long distance plan and pay a la carte 0.01 per minute with a voip Tue, Aug 28, 2007 provider (and actually at the time there was a provider offering free US calling). So I then rewired all the handsets to hang off the asterisk server. There was a couple times when I would screw something up and incoming or outgoing calls wouldn't work but she was patient and I resolved them as quick as I could. My wife still isn't doing cartwheels about the advanced stuff that we can do with the system, but she is as excited as I am with two things: 1) how much money we saved in the first year on long distance even after I bought some asterisk gear and 2) the fact that two (or more) handsets can be in use at the same time - we don't talk on the phone that much but it is surprising how often we are both on the phone. I realize that was more of a testimonial than you were soliciting but imany on the list feel your pain. Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network -Original Message- From: Michael Bryenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 21:47:44 To:asterisk@uc.org Subject: [on-asterisk] Back to Bell for me ... I have a D-Link DI-102 and a Linksys SPA3102 to part with. My experimentation with Trixbox was not Wife-Friendly(c). Bought about 2 months ago - like new. Let me know if you are interested. Mike
Re: [on-asterisk] Back to Bell for me ...
Hi Mike, I switched from Bell to Trixbox about 6 months ago and I have been very happy with it. My wife also did complained a lot initially as it was a quite a challenge to get TB to run in (i call it) hydrid mode. After I went 100% VOIP, my wife stopped complaining. Voice quality was great, mulichannels and all features come with Asterisk... So, VOIP mode is the wife-friendly mode for me. Cheers, Richard - Original Message - From: Michael Bryenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: asterisk@uc.org Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 9:47 PM Subject: [on-asterisk] Back to Bell for me ... I have a D-Link DI-102 and a Linksys SPA3102 to part with. My experimentation with Trixbox was not Wife-Friendly(c). Bought about 2 months ago - like new. Let me know if you are interested. Mike - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[on-asterisk] TAUG Meeting; at City Hall; 7pm, TONIGHT, Tues Aug 28
NOTE: This talk will be DOWNTOWN at 100 Queen Street West in City Hall. The NYCC is presently closed for renovation. TONIGHT, on Tuesday August 28th, Gabe Sawhney will be joining us to talk about [murmur], an audio documentary project that collects and distributes people's stories about specific places. During their daily routines, pedestrians walk past sites marked with a sign indicating the presence of one or more stories, and a telephone number that can be dialed to listen to them. It allows the listener to hear the story of that place, in that place; the details come alive as the listener walks through, around, and into the narrative. The stories are as personal as the relationship people have with the spaces they inhabit. Secret histories unearthed, private truths unveiled and tales as diverse as the city itself are discovered and shared. All members of the community are encouraged to participate and contribute, so that the voice of [murmur] reflects the diversity of the neighbourhood. [murmur] launched in Toronto in 2003, and has since grown to communities in seven cities (with more on the way!). They have been using Asterisk since 2005. Project site: http://murmurtoronto.ca When: TONIGHT, Tuesday August 28th, 2007 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Where: Committee Room #1 City Hall, 100 Queen Street West Toronto, ON (Google map link: http://xrl.us/4dm9) Driving: There is a large parking lot under City Hall. There are entrances off of Queen Street, and Bay Street. TTC: Take the subway to Queen station, then walk west on Queen Street to City Hall. Altenatively take the subway to Osgoode station and walk east on Queen Street to City Hall. Afterwards: We will head over to the Duke of Richmond pub for a bit of socializing. It is at the south end of the Eaton Centre at 20 Queen Street West. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[on-asterisk] Asterisk/VoIP interoperability issues with Bell Teleconferencing
Hi all, Today I tried to join a Bell teleconference call using my Asterisk PBX... it worked right up to the point where I announced my name and press #. Then Bell's system seems to send some kind of SIT tones after announcing my presence, the last of which just kept repeating forever, so I wasn't able to join the teleconference. Has anyone had this problem? Also, has anyone had problems sending DTMF when on speaker phone with a Linksys SPA921/941? - Julian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [on-asterisk] Asterisk/VoIP interoperability issues with Bell Teleconferencing
Might not be a problem with bell, check your what you have your transfer key setup as if your using trixbox(or features.conf), the # may not be getting heard by bell. if your manually rolling your configs just use a standard dial and leave out the T opt. Phil. Julian Dunn wrote: Hi all, Today I tried to join a Bell teleconference call using my Asterisk PBX... it worked right up to the point where I announced my name and press #. Then Bell's system seems to send some kind of SIT tones after announcing my presence, the last of which just kept repeating forever, so I wasn't able to join the teleconference. Has anyone had this problem? Also, has anyone had problems sending DTMF when on speaker phone with a Linksys SPA921/941? - Julian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Henry L. Coleman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
Look at a management tool called Big Brother (www.bb4.com). You can set that to do much more granular work that just PING. Then, launch new routing scripts as appropriate when it sees events. - dbc. -Original Message- From: Apache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henry L.Coleman Sent: August-28-07 1:17 PM To: asterisk@uc.org Subject: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Henry L. Coleman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
Henry: I 100% agree with the rational for what you are doing, however I wouldn't do this on the Asterisk box. I would look into a hardware appliance for this. Something like a HotBrick LB-2 would work great for this and they are fairly cheap as well. http://www.redundantinternet.com/en/LB-2.html Regards, Bill - Original Message - From: Henry L.Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: asterisk@uc.org Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:16 PM Subject: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Henry L. Coleman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [on-asterisk] Asterisk/VoIP interoperability issues with Bell Teleconferencing
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 12:44 PM, Philip Mullis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Might not be a problem with bell, check your what you have your transfer key setup as if your using trixbox(or features.conf), the # may not be getting heard by bell. if your manually rolling your configs just use a standard dial and leave out the T opt. What I meant is that I was able to dial into the conference 1-866 number and join the conference in progress, but right after the conferencing service announced my presence, it sends some kind of short DTMF tones (I mistakenly called them SIT tones in my previous message) which just kept getting repeated - like someone was leaning on a dialpad. - Julian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
My understanding is that www.pfsense.com has dual connection failover (could build rules on traffic, etc...) might be a better route to take. Regards, Chuck -Original Message- From: Apache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henry L.Coleman Sent: August-28-07 1:17 PM To: asterisk@uc.org Subject: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL We all are aware that the uptime of a single DSL or Cable connection to an ITSP is less than that of analog lines or a T1 so I'm putting out the idea of using DSL and Cable where the chances of both failing at the same time are very low. In normal operation the DSL would handle Voice (Asterisk) while the cable would handle any data traffic. So here's the plan (remember I'm not a network guy) A cron job on the Asterisk server continually pings an external server should the Ping take more than a two seconds then * IP address is change to share the Data network until service is resumed. Is this a plan or am I just whistling Dixie TTFN Henry -- Henry L. Coleman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL
John: Good question, I have the answer for you. You can tell the box to prefer one connection over the other for certain routes (based on source or destination IP address) during normal operation (both connections up). If the preferred connection fails, then the traffic falls over to the other connection. Bill - Original Message - From: John Van Ostrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bill Sandiford [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 2:17 PM Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] Using Cable as a failover from DSL Bill Sandiford wrote: Henry: I 100% agree with the rational for what you are doing, however I wouldn't do this on the Asterisk box. I would look into a hardware appliance for this. Something like a HotBrick LB-2 would work great for this and they are fairly cheap as well. http://www.redundantinternet.com/en/LB-2.html This might not perform as you expect. It's probably used to load balance things like HTTP sessions where the from IP address is less of an issue. How would one control which WAN would be used to register SIP? Then when a WAN connection fails Asterisk would still need to re-register. Could you register via both? When I've done this in the past, I've established a VPN over the Internet (I controlled both ends) and when the IP changed the VPN would re-establish and all the existing connections would lurch forward and continue one. Still in your case calls would go dead until the LAN re-established. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
