Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 11:36:03AM -0500, sean darcy wrote:
>> Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
>> ...........................
>>> The messages in bug 12099 are *not* errors, they are annoyances only.
>>> The latest SVN branch 1.4 code of Asterisk will no longer generate them,
>> Using today's svn 3915:
>>
>> ..........................
>> Answer("Zap/2-1", "") in new stack
>> -- Executing [EMAIL PROTECTED]:2] Dial("Zap/2-1", "Zap/4/2375678")
>> in new stack
>> -- Called 4/2375678
>> [Mar 2 11:15:35] WARNING[2320]: chan_zap.c:4424 zt_handle_event:
>> Detected alarm on channel 4: Red Alarm
>> -- Hungup 'Zap/4-1'
>> == Everyone is busy/congested at this time (1:0/0/1)
>> -- Executing [EMAIL PROTECTED]:3] Congestion("Zap/2-1", "") in new
>> stack
>> [Mar 2 11:15:35] NOTICE[2320]: chan_zap.c:7514 handle_init_event: Alarm
>> cleared on channel 4
>> == Spawn extension (internal, 2375678, 3) exited non-zero on 'Zap/2-1'
>> -- Hungup 'Zap/2-1'
>>
>> zap show status
>> Description Alarms IRQ bpviol CRC4
>> Fra Codi Options LBO
>> Wildcard TDM400P REV I Board 1 OK 0 0 0
>> CAS Unk YEL 0 db (CSU)/0-133 feet (DSX-1)
>
> This shows alarms on the whole span (the card). The alarms in question
> are alarms on specific channels. The whole interface makes more sense in
> the other meduims where the span usually corresponds to one physical
> meduim.
>
I'm a little confused. Are you responding to my including the zap show
status command ( which I did just for background), or to the call
description? If you are responding to the call description, doesn't the
alarm show up specifically on channel 4?
In any event, as least for me the TDM400P seems to have problems with
zaptel svn - not just an annoyance.
sean
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
