Hi Petr, thats ok: VCS sends this LRQ to check if the other gatekeeper is alive and will accepty any response to it as a sign that the other gatekeeper is ok. So the LRJ is perfectly fine as a response.
Regards, Jan Petr Holub wrote: > Hi, > > I've encountered a problem with a TANDBERG VCS: I've configured > a VCS as a GnuGk neighbor and I'm getting > LRJ|xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx|gatekeeper-monitoring-check:h323_ID > I've read > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.telephony.openh323gk.user/13911 > but even configuring a permanent endpoint doesn't help until I enable > AcceptNonNeighborLRQ=1 > > This is weird since GnuGk seems to accept VCS as a neighbor > > 2011/08/16 11:52:12.758 1 Neighbor.cxx(332) Set neighbor > AVTEST-VCS- > CONTROL(xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1719) send=nnnnnnnn accept=mmmmmmmm > > and even calls get through and I'm able to place calls in VCS->GnuGk > direction and I see them as being received from a neighbor: > > Number of Calls: 1 Active: 0 From Neighbor: 1 From Parent: 0 > > I'm also able to call in the oposite direction GnuGk->VCS. > > Does anybody have an idea, why AcceptNonNeighborLRQ is needed? > > Thanks, > Petr -- Jan Willamowius, j...@willamowius.de, http://www.gnugk.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ uberSVN's rich system and user administration capabilities and model configuration take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. Learn more about uberSVN and get a free download at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev _______________________________________________________ Posting: mailto:Openh323gk-users@lists.sourceforge.net Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=openh323gk-users Unsubscribe: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openh323gk-users Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/
