Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
I can't vouch for the image quality personally, but I have yet to hear of any complaints regarding quality from the end users. Craig - Original Message - From: Matthew Boehm [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Asterisk Users asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 11:16 AM Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP?? Damn. I'm using spandsp0.0.2pre15 and asterisk 1.0.7 with a single span card (US PRI) and I can get it to work about 85% of the time on a single 1 paged fax. I count a failed fax if any of the tiff images don't look like the original. I tried sending thru a 15 page fax. All 15 pages were received in the tiff image, but every 2 or 3 pages, it would seem as if the image skipped an inch. So instead of being 8.5 x 11, it was 8.5 x 10 (or 9). -Matthew From: Craig Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:51:22 +0800 To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP?? I agree with Steve on this, am piloting Spandsp 0.0.2pre15 on asterisk 1.0.7 with a TE405p, euroisdn. Fedora Core 2, kernel 2.6.9. Running on an old Dell Optiplex desktop PIII 450mhz with 256mb ram. Takes on average 350 faxes / day with just under 1% failed faxes. I define a failed fax as one with a filesize of 8bytes or won't render to pdf. On the strength of the pilot I am planning to install it to production at another site that takes approx 800 faxes per day. Craig - Original Message - From: Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP?? Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I have had hundreds of complaints about spandsp reliability. I have analysed at least 50 or 60 audio logs. I have found maybe 5 or 6 which has real spandsp problems. The rest had frame slips. Of the 5 or 6 with real problems, most have been fixed in the latest version. I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. These HP machines really are total crap. I have workarounds in spandsp for several blatently wrong things they do. I don't yet know who is at fault with this latest problem. Regards, Steve Jeremy Melanson wrote: More like, I already have enough Digium cards, and I don't want purchase a bunch of fax/modems and more Digium cards than I alrady have. I have a PRI line that I'd like to support high-volume faxing on. I've gotten SpanDSP to work with * over the PRI, but I need a more reliability. That, and I guess I'm probably just being cheap too :-) - Jeremy On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 13:15 -0500, Anton Krall wrote: Maybe I started the day slow :) but let me see if I undertood correctly. You say that you don't want to rely on having to buy Digums or any other type of cards in oder to tie everything into spandsp and * but you would rather have dedicated PSTN lines with faxes on them? |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |I guess I didn't word this right. |It's not that SpanDSP ties up extensions, as it definitely |doesn't. I was more referring to the standard hardware-based |solutions out there that need to have a dedicated line for an |incoming fax. I need the ability to send and receive faxes |with a good amount of reliability, and would love to integrate |it with Asterisk. I'm just not keen on needing to buy a bunch |of Digium TDM cards just to support such a solution. | |Don't get me wrong, SpanDSP is great! I'm just looking for |something a little more enterprise-ready. | |On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 12:07 -0500, Eric Wieling aka ManxPower wrote: | I wasn't aware that SpanDSP tied up a bunch of extensions. | | Jeremy Melanson wrote: |I'm trying to see if anyone knows of an alternative solution, | commercial or non-commercial, to SpanDSP. I'm specifically looking |for another software-based, DSP fax that doesn't require me to add a tie up a | bunch of extensions on my PBX. | | Has anyone ever seen such an animal, or gotten such it to play nice | with Asterisk? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On April 26, 2005 10:57 am, Eric Wieling aka ManxPower wrote: We have terrible problems sending faxes via the TDM cards. Not even using SpanDSP. Just TE110P for the telco side and TDM400P for the fax machine. Yes there is a timing issue that crept in somewhere in the last 12-15 months; I believe it's related to the CPU use spiking every few seconds. I would sort of disagree with the spiking thingie (now). If you modify the zttest app to provide timing output in terms of seconds and microseconds, you don't see the spiking impacting those measurements. Rather, you see 8,192 bytes arriving in something greater then 1.000 seconds on a very consistent basis. In my case, that timing is right at 1.02 seconds (about 20,000 microseconds late), which translates into a missed/slipped frame for about one of fifty frames. Not cool with spandsp at all, but not noticed for pure voice use. The design of the card (and asterisk) is 100% oriented around receiving 8,192 bytes from the card every 1. seconds exactly. Any significant variation from 1.000 seconds will result in a missed frame (1024 bytes) sooner or later. What I've not been able to figure out is why the delay. I'm 95% sure it has more to do with asterisk code (including drivers) then it does with other system interrupt handlers, interrupt latency, etc. Those _other_ things certainly can impact it, but there is definitely something within asterisk that is directly related to the TDM card and its drivers. (Its almost consistent enough to look closer at the clocking on the TDM itself. That assumes a clock on the TDM card is responsible for raising the interrupt to the O/S via the pci bus.) ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Re] Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Hi Cyril,
Good work. process_baud is a fairly big routine, and your backtrace
doesn't give the actual line number at which things fall over. However,
studying the code I see that I do not protect against the possibility of
a divide by zero during the initial coarse carrier estimation of any of
the fast modems.
I just created 0.0.2pre16, which should eliminate this. Can you try it,
and tell me what happens?
Regards,
Steve
Cyril VELTER wrote:
If you can catch one of these events, and get a traceback of the stack,
I will take a look. This is not happening to most users, so it must be
some specific combination of things on your machine. I have reports of
high volume faxing running for extended periods from some users.
Hi steve,
I use spandsp on one production machine (for receiving fax only) and have
experienced some crash. It's pretty rare, and seem to be related to a
particular fax machine trying to send a fax. When I get a crash, I ususally get
three or for at several minutes interval). I've not been able to identify the
sender fax.
I've some asterisk core dump files. All the crashes occur in libspandsp.so in
the process_baud function.
You'll find bt and bt full output at the end of this email. If you need more
informations, please contact me.
I'm running spandsp 0.0.2pre11 and asterisk CVS as of march 28.
Cyril
Here's the bt result :
#0 0x010025ab in process_baud () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
#1 0x01001bd6 in v27ter_rx () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
#2 0x00ff6334 in fax_rx_process () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
#3 0x006a9aa1 in rxfax_exec (chan=0x9af63b8, data=0xac9f5410) at
app_rxfax.c:274
#4 0x0808407d in pbx_extension_helper (c=0x9af63b8, con=0x0, context=0x9af6500
fax, exten=0x9af65f4 s, priority=2, label=0x0,
callerid=0xac9fb700
/var/spool/asterisk/faxin/467738570-20050414-121811.tif, action=0) at
pbx.c:482
#5 0x0807c19a in ast_pbx_run (c=0x9af63b8) at pbx.c:1875
#6 0x08084891 in pbx_thread (data=0x0) at pbx.c:2120
#7 0x00660dec in start_thread () from /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0
#8 0x003b3a2a in clone () from /lib/tls/libc.so.6
Here's the bt full :
(gdb) bt full
#0 0x010025ab in process_baud () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
No symbol table info available.
#1 0x01001bd6 in v27ter_rx () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
No symbol table info available.
#2 0x00ff6334 in fax_rx_process () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
No symbol table info available.
#3 0x006a9aa1 in rxfax_exec (chan=0x9af63b8, data=0xac9f5410) at
app_rxfax.c:274
res = 0
count = 0
percentflag = 0
fil =
/var/spool/asterisk/faxin/467738570-20050414-121811.tif\000 [EMAIL PROTECTED]@\000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]@\000xt\237¬\033k3\000 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
\000\000 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
;30;40m--
\033[0;37;[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]@\000§\000\000\000àD\017\b...
tmp = /var/spool/asterisk/faxin/467738570-20050414-121811.tif, '\0'
repeats 200 times, ·
x = 0x0
i = 0
fax = {local_ident = LODGIS, '\0' repeats 14 times, far_ident =
0467738570\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000,
sub_address = '\0' repeats 20 times, password = '\0' repeats 20 times,
vendor = 0x0, model = 0x0, verbose = 0, phase_b_handler = 0,
phase_b_user_data = 0x0, phase_d_handler = 0x6a9648 phase_d_handler,
phase_d_user_data = 0x9af63b8, phase_e_handler = 0x6a93f8 phase_e_handler,
phase_e_user_data = 0x9af63b8, t30_flush_handler = 0, t30_flush_user_data =
0x0, options = 0, phase = 5, next_phase = 0, state = 6, mode = 0,
msgendtime = 32000, samplecount = 0, dtc_frame = '\0' repeats 14 times,
dtc_len = 0, dcs_frame = '\0' repeats 14 times, dcs_len = 0,
dis_frame = \200\000Îô\200\200\201\200\200\200\030\000\000\000, dis_len =
11, in_message = 0, tone_gen = {v2_1 = 1005.99878, v3_1 = -6413.77002,
fac_1 = -0.156918198, v2_2 = 0, v3_2 = 0, fac_2 = 0, duration = {20800,
600, 0, 0}, repeat = 0, current_section = -1, current_position = 0}, hdlcrx = {
crc_bytes = 2, frame_handler = 0xff389c process_rx_crp+28, user_data =
0xac9f5620, report_bad_frames = 0, rx_state = 1, bitbuf = 2332973030,
byteinprogress = 223, numbits = 3, buffer =
ÿ\023\203\000\212 \200\200\200\200\200\200\020\r§¸\003, '\0' repeats
376 times, len = 0,
rx_bytes = 36, rx_frames = 2, rx_crc_errors = 0, rx_length_errors = 1,
rx_aborts = 1}, hdlctx = {crc_bytes = 2,
underflow_handler = 0xff2338 fast_getbit+284, user_data = 0xac9f5620,
numbits = 4, idle_byte = 231, len = 0,
buffer = '~' repeats 44 times, ûà\000²¤¸\210¼\214\201, '\001' repeats
13 times,
)\207\237\237\237\237¾ø\200\020\a2ð\020\030\020\020\020\021\214oGç, '\0'
repeats 311 times, pos = 0, byte = 7392, bits = 3, underflow_reported = 1},
v21tx = {baud_rate = 300, get_bit = 0xfead04 hdlc_tx_getbyte+88,
user_data = 0xac9f58fc, phase_rates = {993211187, 885837004}, scaling =
7218, current_phase_rate =
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On April 27, 2005 09:04 am, Rich Adamson wrote: I would sort of disagree with the spiking thingie (now). If you modify the zttest app to provide timing output in terms of seconds and microseconds, you don't see the spiking impacting those measurements. Rather, you see 8,192 bytes arriving in something greater then 1.000 seconds on a very consistent basis. Do you have a copy of this patch? I'd like to work on this problem with you (in my ample spare time, ha!). The design of the card (and asterisk) is 100% oriented around receiving 8,192 bytes from the card every 1. seconds exactly. Any significant variation from 1.000 seconds will result in a missed frame (1024 bytes) sooner or later. *nod* What I've not been able to figure out is why the delay. I'm 95% sure it has more to do with asterisk code (including drivers) then it does with other system interrupt handlers, interrupt latency, etc. Those _other_ things certainly can impact it, but there is definitely something within asterisk that is directly related to the TDM card and its drivers. (Its almost consistent enough to look closer at the clocking on the TDM itself. That assumes a clock on the TDM card is responsible for raising the interrupt to the O/S via the pci bus.) Well the clock on the TDM400P is the same as what is used in the T100P, X100P (or is it X101P?) and TE110P. It's just a cheap crystal oscillator within the TJ320 so at least in theory the same problem should exist with those cards if it were an oscillator issue. Even cheap oscillators are more accurate than this though. :-) I'm curious though if the CPU spiking in the wctdm driver has something to do with it (causing the time to stretch), especially since this isn't seen on the other cards, only within that driver, and it's only that card that seems to have it. (I'll reply to your original post about the zttest stuff in -dev and we can continue this there.) -A. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Re] Re: [Re] Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Cyril VELTER wrote: I just installed it and will keep you informed if a new crash occur, but even with pre15, crash where not very frequent and usually come in series (~ one serie of 3/4 crashes every two weeks, so we might have to wait some time...). I'm pretty happy with the receiving side of spandsp (I don't use the sending side yet), processing about 60 incomming fax per days from a lot of differents sender. The success rate is quite good, but there is ~2 or 3 fax per day which are truncated or with missing pages. I'm wondering if implementing ECM should improve this and if you plan to do it someday ? Intermixed with the T.38 work I am doing, is work to flesh out the T.30 implementation to be complete. Of course, that will include ECM. Someone is working on making HylaFAX play nicely with spandsp, so HylaFAX does queuing and spandsp does the FAX transfers. If that all works out we should have a very nice FAX platform. Regards, Steve ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Re] Re: [Re] Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Hi Steve, Good work. process_baud is a fairly big routine, and your backtrace doesn't give the actual line number at which things fall over. However, studying the code I see that I do not protect against the possibility of a divide by zero during the initial coarse carrier estimation of any of the fast modems. I just created 0.0.2pre16, which should eliminate this. Can you try it, and tell me what happens? I just installed it and will keep you informed if a new crash occur, but even with pre15, crash where not very frequent and usually come in series (~ one serie of 3/4 crashes every two weeks, so we might have to wait some time...). I'm pretty happy with the receiving side of spandsp (I don't use the sending side yet), processing about 60 incomming fax per days from a lot of differents sender. The success rate is quite good, but there is ~2 or 3 fax per day which are truncated or with missing pages. I'm wondering if implementing ECM should improve this and if you plan to do it someday ? Thanks for your work, Cyril ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Cross posting on purpose to transition the thread to -dev The issue in this thread is the frame transfer rate for the TDM analog card almost always exceeds the 1.000 seconds expected by the design. The frame transfer rate seldem impacts voice (the missed frames aren't noticed), but seriously impact code such as spandsp. From: Andrew Kohlsmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] On April 27, 2005 09:04 am, Rich Adamson wrote: I would sort of disagree with the spiking thingie (now). If you modify the zttest app to provide timing output in terms of seconds and microseconds, you don't see the spiking impacting those measurements. Rather, you see 8,192 bytes arriving in something greater then 1.000 seconds on a very consistent basis. Do you have a copy of this patch? I'd like to work on this problem with you (in my ample spare time, ha!). No I don't. I just inserted printf's in the 80+ line app to inspect the actual timing values (as opposed to viewing that mostly meaningless percentage number). The design of the card (and asterisk) is 100% oriented around receiving 8,192 bytes from the card every 1. seconds exactly. Any significant variation from 1.000 seconds will result in a missed frame (1024 bytes) sooner or later. *nod* What I've not been able to figure out is why the delay. I'm 95% sure it has more to do with asterisk code (including drivers) then it does with other system interrupt handlers, interrupt latency, etc. Those _other_ things certainly can impact it, but there is definitely something within asterisk that is directly related to the TDM card and its drivers. (Its almost consistent enough to look closer at the clocking on the TDM itself. That assumes a clock on the TDM card is responsible for raising the interrupt to the O/S via the pci bus.) Well the clock on the TDM400P is the same as what is used in the T100P, X100P (or is it X101P?) and TE110P. It's just a cheap crystal oscillator within the TJ320 so at least in theory the same problem should exist with those cards if it were an oscillator issue. That crystal oscillator is supposedly a standalone component that drives whatever other chips (on the card) the designer wants to use if for. Presumably, it is driving the 3050 (I didn't check). But, through some mechanism, the 3050 is serially sending pcm data bytes to the TJ320, and it appears _it_ buffers up that data and raises the pci interrupt to the O/S. So, any component associated with that process is including in my definition of clocking the interrupts (not just the crystal). Even cheap oscillators are more accurate than this though. :-) I'm curious though if the CPU spiking in the wctdm driver has something to do with it (causing the time to stretch), especially since this isn't seen on the other cards, only within that driver, and it's only that card that seems to have it. If one includes a couple of printf's to watch the seconds and microseconds used in the zttest calculation, then execute 'zttest -v', the reported times will consistently be something like 1.021234 seconds. Even though vmstat shows the spiking, it does not show up in the time reported for the zttest to receive 8,192 bytes of data. That would suggest the spiking isn't the root cause for the TDM card's missed frames. Since the vmstat spiking occurs roughly every ten seconds, one would expect it to have an impact on at least some of the zttest output. But, I've not seen that happen as yet. Opinion: the TDM analog card is subject to a number of system level issues, but underlying those issues seems to be an asterisk-code problem (including drivers) that does not support receiving the expected 8,192 bytes from the TDM card in 1. seconds. (According to Steve Underwood, that was not a problem about six to nine months ago, but it is now.) (I'll reply to your original post about the zttest stuff in -dev and we can continue this there.) I'll modify the zttest.c app and post the mod's on the -dev list, and maybe we can narrow down the root cause for the TDM issues. Direct eamil for those that want is fine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). I'll be out of the office for the remainder of today, but will continue with this later today or tomorrow morning. Rich ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I have had hundreds of complaints about spandsp reliability. I have analysed at least 50 or 60 audio logs. I have found maybe 5 or 6 which has real spandsp problems. The rest had frame slips. Of the 5 or 6 with real problems, most have been fixed in the latest version. I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. These HP machines really are total crap. I have workarounds in spandsp for several blatently wrong things they do. I don't yet know who is at fault with this latest problem. Regards, Steve Jeremy Melanson wrote: More like, I already have enough Digium cards, and I don't want purchase a bunch of fax/modems and more Digium cards than I alrady have. I have a PRI line that I'd like to support high-volume faxing on. I've gotten SpanDSP to work with * over the PRI, but I need a more reliability. That, and I guess I'm probably just being cheap too :-) - Jeremy On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 13:15 -0500, Anton Krall wrote: Maybe I started the day slow :) but let me see if I undertood correctly. You say that you don't want to rely on having to buy Digums or any other type of cards in oder to tie everything into spandsp and * but you would rather have dedicated PSTN lines with faxes on them? |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |I guess I didn't word this right. |It's not that SpanDSP ties up extensions, as it definitely |doesn't. I was more referring to the standard hardware-based |solutions out there that need to have a dedicated line for an |incoming fax. I need the ability to send and receive faxes |with a good amount of reliability, and would love to integrate |it with Asterisk. I'm just not keen on needing to buy a bunch |of Digium TDM cards just to support such a solution. | |Don't get me wrong, SpanDSP is great! I'm just looking for |something a little more enterprise-ready. | |On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 12:07 -0500, Eric Wieling aka ManxPower wrote: | I wasn't aware that SpanDSP tied up a bunch of extensions. | | Jeremy Melanson wrote: |I'm trying to see if anyone knows of an alternative solution, | commercial or non-commercial, to SpanDSP. I'm specifically looking |for another software-based, DSP fax that doesn't require me to add a tie up a | bunch of extensions on my PBX. | | Has anyone ever seen such an animal, or gotten such it to play nice | with Asterisk? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On April 26, 2005 08:12 am, Steve Underwood wrote: Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I've had spandsp crash out on some kind of floating point error about a half dozen times over about 250 faxes When it crashes it takes Asterisk down with it. These systems are SuperMicro Xeon server-class systems, no overclocking, RAM was tested overnight with memtest86, no-nonsense, nothing funny type machines. SpanDSP and Asterisk were both compiled with the same compiler without any oddball optimizations (just whatever's in the default makefiles). It's a bitch to try and reconstruct, but it's the only reason I'm not using spandsp in production; when I was using spandsp I had it on a completely separate machine on the local LAN to avoid the spandsp crashes from taking the voice part down. -A. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Hi Steve, I sent a mail to this list a week ago regarding exactly this issue. Spandsp doesn't work for me (getting 200rows tiffs), but sending and receiving faxes through a FXS-FXO bridge (a TDM11B) works without problems. My motherboard is based an Aopen AK33 (VIA686a chipset, KT133, 700Mhz Athlon). I've disabled USB, 2nd IDE, VGA interrupt (runing without X), sound.. I've also tweaked PCI settings in the BIOS, testing each time, but I don't know what can be wrong. Here is some more info: cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 0: 23411526 XT-PIC timer 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade 4: 80 XT-PIC serial 8: 1 XT-PIC rtc 10: 23322936 XT-PIC wctdm 12: 1 XT-PIC acpi 14: 91663 XT-PIC ide0 15: 51573 XT-PIC eth0 NMI: 0 ERR: 0 $ ./zttest Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% Thanks Julian J. M. On 4/26/05, Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I have had hundreds of complaints about spandsp reliability. I have analysed at least 50 or 60 audio logs. I have found maybe 5 or 6 which has real spandsp problems. The rest had frame slips. Of the 5 or 6 with real problems, most have been fixed in the latest version. I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. These HP machines really are total crap. I have workarounds in spandsp for several blatently wrong things they do. I don't yet know who is at fault with this latest problem. Regards, Steve ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
I'd have to second this, it works flawlessly for us, the issues we do have are with devices not properly turning off echo cancellation... W. Kevin Hunt CCIE #11841 MCSE, Linux+ SME www.huntbrothers.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Underwood Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 7:13 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP?? Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I have had hundreds of complaints about spandsp reliability. I have analysed at least 50 or 60 audio logs. I have found maybe 5 or 6 which has real spandsp problems. The rest had frame slips. Of the 5 or 6 with real problems, most have been fixed in the latest version. I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Hi Andrew, If you can catch one of these events, and get a traceback of the stack, I will take a look. This is not happening to most users, so it must be some specific combination of things on your machine. I have reports of high volume faxing running for extended periods from some users. Regards, Steve Andrew Kohlsmith wrote: On April 26, 2005 08:12 am, Steve Underwood wrote: Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I've had spandsp crash out on some kind of floating point error about a half dozen times over about 250 faxes When it crashes it takes Asterisk down with it. These systems are SuperMicro Xeon server-class systems, no overclocking, RAM was tested overnight with memtest86, no-nonsense, nothing funny type machines. SpanDSP and Asterisk were both compiled with the same compiler without any oddball optimizations (just whatever's in the default makefiles). It's a bitch to try and reconstruct, but it's the only reason I'm not using spandsp in production; when I was using spandsp I had it on a completely separate machine on the local LAN to avoid the spandsp crashes from taking the voice part down. -A. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Hi Julian, Sounds like a frame slip problem if the result depends on the source. Most people, including me, have trouble with the TDM cards. They worked without problem when I was first developing the FAX software in spandsp, so I assume the TDM driver has gathered bugs since that time. Regards, Steve Julian J. M. wrote: Hi Steve, I sent a mail to this list a week ago regarding exactly this issue. Spandsp doesn't work for me (getting 200rows tiffs), but sending and receiving faxes through a FXS-FXO bridge (a TDM11B) works without problems. My motherboard is based an Aopen AK33 (VIA686a chipset, KT133, 700Mhz Athlon). I've disabled USB, 2nd IDE, VGA interrupt (runing without X), sound.. I've also tweaked PCI settings in the BIOS, testing each time, but I don't know what can be wrong. Here is some more info: cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 0: 23411526 XT-PIC timer 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade 4: 80 XT-PIC serial 8: 1 XT-PIC rtc 10: 23322936 XT-PIC wctdm 12: 1 XT-PIC acpi 14: 91663 XT-PIC ide0 15: 51573 XT-PIC eth0 NMI: 0 ERR: 0 $ ./zttest Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% Thanks Julian J. M. On 4/26/05, Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I have had hundreds of complaints about spandsp reliability. I have analysed at least 50 or 60 audio logs. I have found maybe 5 or 6 which has real spandsp problems. The rest had frame slips. Of the 5 or 6 with real problems, most have been fixed in the latest version. I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. These HP machines really are total crap. I have workarounds in spandsp for several blatently wrong things they do. I don't yet know who is at fault with this latest problem. Regards, Steve ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
As Steve has mentioned several times, it seems the TDM-fxo boards have an issue with missed frames that no one is addressing. Very few (if any) TDM users have been able to make spandsp function correctly, and the few that might have it working don't know why. Having played around some with zttest (modifying the code to better understand the issues), it would appear the TDM card consumes about 1.02 seconds to obtain one second of data. That would suggest the card misses about one frame in every fifty. Haven't figured out why as yet and don't know that I've got the practical experience to actually find the root cause. I sent a mail to this list a week ago regarding exactly this issue. Spandsp doesn't work for me (getting 200rows tiffs), but sending and receiving faxes through a FXS-FXO bridge (a TDM11B) works without problems. My motherboard is based an Aopen AK33 (VIA686a chipset, KT133, 700Mhz Athlon). I've disabled USB, 2nd IDE, VGA interrupt (runing without X), sound.. I've also tweaked PCI settings in the BIOS, testing each time, but I don't know what can be wrong. Here is some more info: cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 0: 23411526 XT-PIC timer 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade 4: 80 XT-PIC serial 8: 1 XT-PIC rtc 10: 23322936 XT-PIC wctdm 12: 1 XT-PIC acpi 14: 91663 XT-PIC ide0 15: 51573 XT-PIC eth0 NMI: 0 ERR: 0 $ ./zttest Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% Thanks Julian J. M. On 4/26/05, Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I have had hundreds of complaints about spandsp reliability. I have analysed at least 50 or 60 audio logs. I have found maybe 5 or 6 which has real spandsp problems. The rest had frame slips. Of the 5 or 6 with real problems, most have been fixed in the latest version. I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. These HP machines really are total crap. I have workarounds in spandsp for several blatently wrong things they do. I don't yet know who is at fault with this latest problem. Regards, Steve ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ---End of Original Message- ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 08:57 -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote: On April 26, 2005 08:12 am, Steve Underwood wrote: Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I've had spandsp crash out on some kind of floating point error about a half dozen times over about 250 faxes When it crashes it takes Asterisk down with it. These systems are SuperMicro Xeon server-class systems, no overclocking, RAM was tested overnight with memtest86, no-nonsense, nothing funny type machines. SpanDSP and Asterisk were both compiled with the same compiler without any oddball optimizations (just whatever's in the default makefiles). It's a bitch to try and reconstruct, but it's the only reason I'm not using spandsp in production; when I was using spandsp I had it on a completely separate machine on the local LAN to avoid the spandsp crashes from taking the voice part down. I was under the impression that pretty much all of these problems were usually traced to the version of libtiff that was in use... Perhaps you should try to track it down/solve the problem rather than patch it over? Of course, it is sometimes difficult to keep working on solving a problem when you don't have the knowledge to find the problem, and a client just wants it to work right :) Regards, Adam -- -- Adam Goryachev Website Managers Ph: +61 2 9345 4395[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +61 2 9345 4396www.websitemanagers.com.au ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 14:11 +0100, Julian J. M. wrote: Hi Steve, I sent a mail to this list a week ago regarding exactly this issue. Spandsp doesn't work for me (getting 200rows tiffs), but sending and receiving faxes through a FXS-FXO bridge (a TDM11B) works without problems. My motherboard is based an Aopen AK33 (VIA686a chipset, KT133, 700Mhz Athlon). I've disabled USB, 2nd IDE, VGA interrupt (runing without X), sound.. I've also tweaked PCI settings in the BIOS, testing each time, but I don't know what can be wrong. Here is some more info: I think the useful debug info is the audio files rxfax will record if you enable the debugging These would allow Steve to re-create what happened, and I assume, fix spandsp and perhaps even test it using the same input file... Personally, I'd like to see (and I assume so would Steve) everyone who has all the required debug info, send it to Steve so that we can end up with a better fax solution. In fact, I think we would probably end up being MORE compatible than any other fax product on the market (well, maybe :) Regards, Adam -- -- Adam Goryachev Website Managers Ph: +61 2 9345 4395[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +61 2 9345 4396www.websitemanagers.com.au ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 08:34 -0600, Rich Adamson wrote: As Steve has mentioned several times, it seems the TDM-fxo boards have an issue with missed frames that no one is addressing. Very few (if any) TDM users have been able to make spandsp function correctly, and the few that might have it working don't know why. Having played around some with zttest (modifying the code to better understand the issues), it would appear the TDM card consumes about 1.02 seconds to obtain one second of data. That would suggest the card misses about one frame in every fifty. Haven't figured out why as yet and don't know that I've got the practical experience to actually find the root cause. Hmmm, interesting... my box is has a X100P, a TDM40B and a TE410p, and I don't seem to have a problem receiving a fax (via the TE410p) yet. ie, I haven't had any complaints, and maybe 10 successful faxes, so it isn't exactly foolproof, but so far so good. I'd still like to see someone say they receive some large number of faxes daily with spandsp from random senders (ie, not 100 faxes/day from the same junk fax sender :) Oh, and a description of their equipment would also be nice Even number of concurrent faxes they process, etc... Regards, Adam -- -- Adam Goryachev Website Managers Ph: +61 2 9345 4395[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +61 2 9345 4396www.websitemanagers.com.au ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On April 26, 2005 09:47 am, Adam Goryachev wrote: I was under the impression that pretty much all of these problems were usually traced to the version of libtiff that was in use... Perhaps you should try to track it down/solve the problem rather than patch it over? Nope; it's not a tiff issue; using the clean (source-built) libtiff recommended by spandsp (3.5.7 I think offhand?) -- it was failing inside of spandsp with the FPU exception. I think I posted about it here before, let me see if I can dig it up. Of course, it is sometimes difficult to keep working on solving a problem when you don't have the knowledge to find the problem, and a client just wants it to work right :) :-) Well in this case I'm my own client, but I have 35 people in the same office who tend to raise holy hell when things like the phones don't work. :-) -A. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Having played around some with zttest (modifying the code to better understand the issues), it would appear the TDM card consumes about 1.02 seconds to obtain one second of data. That would suggest the I would like to chime in with my experience: We are trying to use SpanDSP off of a PRI to recieve 200 faxes a day. It's gone OK but not perfect. Some gotchas that I have found: 1. Timing (as others have said) is totally critical. I found a subtle timing error because our Asterisk box is behind an Adtran channel bank and the Adtran introduced tiny slips occasionally. Upgrading the firmware in the adtran and monkeying around with how the Adtran took it's timing from the PRI took care of it (after consultation with Adtran tech support which is first-rate BTW) 2. ZTTEST is a critical metric. I was getting disconnects on about 20% of faxes until I looked at the output of ZTTEST and found that it was dropping below 99.98% occasionally. Using setpci I changed the latency on the Zaptel boards (T100P TDM04) to the max, 254 and cranked down the latency on everything else as low as I dared. Now, I get 99.9873% across the board as long as I run the test, and I even get the magic 100% on 1 in 10 test passes. 3. Yes, we have the HP problem, and I don't know how I'm going to deal with it yet. I'll probably set up a problem fax line with an analog fax and give that number to those people that have the problem. It's always the same guys. I'm getting a reject rate of about 2-3% which is ok but the endusers of course want no rejects. I have to offset that with the convenience of getting the faxes as PDF's (we would take the paper fax and scan it into our CRM if you can believe it) and the monetary savings of not printing the faxes; we have a click rate from our print vendor and he loves it when we make paper 'cause it's more money for him. No more busy signals on the fax line is a bonus too, people being people the fax will sit idle all day then 15-20 faxes will try to come in simultaneously. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
We have terrible problems sending faxes via the TDM cards. Not even using SpanDSP. Just TE110P for the telco side and TDM400P for the fax machine. Steve Underwood wrote: Hi Julian, Sounds like a frame slip problem if the result depends on the source. Most people, including me, have trouble with the TDM cards. They worked without problem when I was first developing the FAX software in spandsp, so I assume the TDM driver has gathered bugs since that time. Regards, Steve Julian J. M. wrote: Hi Steve, I sent a mail to this list a week ago regarding exactly this issue. Spandsp doesn't work for me (getting 200rows tiffs), but sending and receiving faxes through a FXS-FXO bridge (a TDM11B) works without problems. My motherboard is based an Aopen AK33 (VIA686a chipset, KT133, 700Mhz Athlon). I've disabled USB, 2nd IDE, VGA interrupt (runing without X), sound.. I've also tweaked PCI settings in the BIOS, testing each time, but I don't know what can be wrong. Here is some more info: cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 0: 23411526 XT-PIC timer 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade 4: 80 XT-PIC serial 8: 1 XT-PIC rtc 10: 23322936 XT-PIC wctdm 12: 1 XT-PIC acpi 14: 91663 XT-PIC ide0 15: 51573 XT-PIC eth0 NMI: 0 ERR: 0 $ ./zttest Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.987793% 99.975586% 99.987793% Thanks Julian J. M. On 4/26/05, Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I have had hundreds of complaints about spandsp reliability. I have analysed at least 50 or 60 audio logs. I have found maybe 5 or 6 which has real spandsp problems. The rest had frame slips. Of the 5 or 6 with real problems, most have been fixed in the latest version. I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. These HP machines really are total crap. I have workarounds in spandsp for several blatently wrong things they do. I don't yet know who is at fault with this latest problem. Regards, Steve ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Re] Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
If you can catch one of these events, and get a traceback of the stack,
I will take a look. This is not happening to most users, so it must be
some specific combination of things on your machine. I have reports of
high volume faxing running for extended periods from some users.
Hi steve,
I use spandsp on one production machine (for receiving fax only) and
have
experienced some crash. It's pretty rare, and seem to be related to a
particular fax machine trying to send a fax. When I get a crash, I ususally get
three or for at several minutes interval). I've not been able to identify the
sender fax.
I've some asterisk core dump files. All the crashes occur in
libspandsp.so in
the process_baud function.
You'll find bt and bt full output at the end of this email. If you need
more
informations, please contact me.
I'm running spandsp 0.0.2pre11 and asterisk CVS as of march 28.
Cyril
Here's the bt result :
#0 0x010025ab in process_baud () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
#1 0x01001bd6 in v27ter_rx () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
#2 0x00ff6334 in fax_rx_process () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
#3 0x006a9aa1 in rxfax_exec (chan=0x9af63b8, data=0xac9f5410) at
app_rxfax.c:274
#4 0x0808407d in pbx_extension_helper (c=0x9af63b8, con=0x0, context=0x9af6500
fax, exten=0x9af65f4 s, priority=2, label=0x0,
callerid=0xac9fb700
/var/spool/asterisk/faxin/467738570-20050414-121811.tif, action=0) at
pbx.c:482
#5 0x0807c19a in ast_pbx_run (c=0x9af63b8) at pbx.c:1875
#6 0x08084891 in pbx_thread (data=0x0) at pbx.c:2120
#7 0x00660dec in start_thread () from /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0
#8 0x003b3a2a in clone () from /lib/tls/libc.so.6
Here's the bt full :
(gdb) bt full
#0 0x010025ab in process_baud () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
No symbol table info available.
#1 0x01001bd6 in v27ter_rx () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
No symbol table info available.
#2 0x00ff6334 in fax_rx_process () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0
No symbol table info available.
#3 0x006a9aa1 in rxfax_exec (chan=0x9af63b8, data=0xac9f5410) at
app_rxfax.c:274
res = 0
count = 0
percentflag = 0
fil =
/var/spool/asterisk/faxin/[EMAIL PROTECTED]@\000
[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]@\000çD\017\b\001\000
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
;30;40m--
\033[0;37;[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]@\000§\000\000\000àD\017\b...
tmp = /var/spool/asterisk/faxin/467738570-20050414-121811.tif, '\0'
repeats 200 times, ·
x = 0x0
i = 0
fax = {local_ident = LODGIS, '\0' repeats 14 times, far_ident =
0467738570\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000,
sub_address = '\0' repeats 20 times, password = '\0' repeats 20 times,
vendor = 0x0, model = 0x0, verbose = 0, phase_b_handler = 0,
phase_b_user_data = 0x0, phase_d_handler = 0x6a9648 phase_d_handler,
phase_d_user_data = 0x9af63b8, phase_e_handler = 0x6a93f8 phase_e_handler,
phase_e_user_data = 0x9af63b8, t30_flush_handler = 0, t30_flush_user_data =
0x0, options = 0, phase = 5, next_phase = 0, state = 6, mode = 0,
msgendtime = 32000, samplecount = 0, dtc_frame = '\0' repeats 14 times,
dtc_len = 0, dcs_frame = '\0' repeats 14 times, dcs_len = 0,
dis_frame = \200\000Îô\200\200\201\200\200\200\030\000\000\000, dis_len =
11, in_message = 0, tone_gen = {v2_1 = 1005.99878, v3_1 = -6413.77002,
fac_1 = -0.156918198, v2_2 = 0, v3_2 = 0, fac_2 = 0, duration = {20800,
600, 0, 0}, repeat = 0, current_section = -1, current_position = 0}, hdlcrx = {
crc_bytes = 2, frame_handler = 0xff389c process_rx_crp+28, user_data =
0xac9f5620, report_bad_frames = 0, rx_state = 1, bitbuf = 2332973030,
byteinprogress = 223, numbits = 3, buffer =
ÿ\023\203\000\212 \200\200\200\200\200\200\020\r§¸\003, '\0' repeats
376 times, len = 0,
rx_bytes = 36, rx_frames = 2, rx_crc_errors = 0, rx_length_errors = 1,
rx_aborts = 1}, hdlctx = {crc_bytes = 2,
underflow_handler = 0xff2338 fast_getbit+284, user_data = 0xac9f5620,
numbits = 4, idle_byte = 231, len = 0,
buffer = '~' repeats 44 times, ûà\000²¤¸\210¼\214\201, '\001' repeats
13 times,
)\207\237\237\237\237¾ø\200\020\a2ð\020\030\020\020\020\021\214oGç, '\0'
repeats 311 times, pos = 0, byte = 7392, bits = 3, underflow_reported = 1},
v21tx = {baud_rate = 300, get_bit = 0xfead04 hdlc_tx_getbyte+88,
user_data = 0xac9f58fc, phase_rates = {993211187, 885837004}, scaling =
7218, current_phase_rate = 993211187, phase_acc = 2576970184, baud_frac =
53920,
baud_inc = 2457, shutdown = 0}, v21rx = {baud_rate = 300, sync_mode = 1,
put_bit = 0xfea664 crc_itu16_check+44, user_data = 0xac9f5730,
min_power = 260539, power = {shift = 4, reading = 4312573}, carrier_present
= 1, phase_rate = {993211187, 885837004}, phase_acc = {1422704387,
456326156}, correlation_span = 26, window_i = {{432320, 725121, 1257120,
-858300,
Re: [Re] Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On April 26, 2005 11:07 am, Cyril VELTER wrote: #0 0x010025ab in process_baud () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0 #1 0x01001bd6 in v27ter_rx () from /usr/local/lib/libspandsp.so.0 That looks like exactly what I was seeing. -A. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On April 26, 2005 10:57 am, Eric Wieling aka ManxPower wrote: We have terrible problems sending faxes via the TDM cards. Not even using SpanDSP. Just TE110P for the telco side and TDM400P for the fax machine. Yes there is a timing issue that crept in somewhere in the last 12-15 months; I believe it's related to the CPU use spiking every few seconds. -A. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Hello Colin, Did setting the latency timer really helped? What latency do you set for the rest of pci devices? just 0? Julian J. M. On 4/26/05, Colin Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. ZTTEST is a critical metric. I was getting disconnects on about 20% of faxes until I looked at the output of ZTTEST and found that it was dropping below 99.98% occasionally. Using setpci I changed the latency on the Zaptel boards (T100P TDM04) to the max, 254 and cranked down the latency on everything else as low as I dared. Now, I get 99.9873% across the board as long as I run the test, and I even get the magic 100% on 1 in 10 test passes. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Steve Underwood wrote: I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. These HP machines really are total crap. I have workarounds in spandsp for several blatently wrong things they do. I don't yet know who is at fault with this latest problem. Hmm. I have a HP LaserJet 3015 which is a multifunction. When I try faxing to asterisk with RxFax I only see the first one inch or so. The fax machine always thinks the fax was completely successful. I haven't spent any more time researching this than about 15 minutes to find the above, so I wonder if this is what you are referring to or if the sending HP fax machine will actually say an error occured and consider the fax failed? I'll gladly provide debug info if it helps, but I don't want to waste time if this is going nowhere. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Yes, I think it did. I measured it before and after and with default settings and changing the Zaptel cards to FF (254). With the default settings, I would get 99.9873% but occasionally dropping to 99.95XXX%. Changing latency_timer to FF on the Zap cards and everything else to 0 gave me 99.9873% consistiently with an occasional spike to 100%. We processed over 150 faxes today OK, with 2 rejected, both from the same guy and exhibiting symptom of the HP fax problem. YMMV. My config: Netfinity 5500 4-way 550 Xeon, 2 gig, RAID 5 with the cursed NetRAID, FC2-771smp, Asterisk 1-0 stable, LibPri 1-0, TDM400, T100P, latest LibTiff, the one that they say works good. AMP, Sendmail, MySql. Lightly loaded server, only handling a couple hundred (voice) calls a day. SIP on the LAN with IAX to a few locations, ALAW. -Original Message- From: Julian J. M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 2:15 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP?? Hello Colin, Did setting the latency timer really helped? What latency do you set for the rest of pci devices? just 0? Julian J. M. On 4/26/05, Colin Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. ZTTEST is a critical metric. I was getting disconnects on about 20% of faxes until I looked at the output of ZTTEST and found that it was dropping below 99.98% occasionally. Using setpci I changed the latency on the Zaptel boards (T100P TDM04) to the max, 254 and cranked down the latency on everything else as low as I dared. Now, I get 99.9873% across the board as long as I run the test, and I even get the magic 100% on 1 in 10 test passes. ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
I agree with Steve on this, am piloting Spandsp 0.0.2pre15 on asterisk 1.0.7 with a TE405p, euroisdn. Fedora Core 2, kernel 2.6.9. Running on an old Dell Optiplex desktop PIII 450mhz with 256mb ram. Takes on average 350 faxes / day with just under 1% failed faxes. I define a failed fax as one with a filesize of 8bytes or won't render to pdf. On the strength of the pilot I am planning to install it to production at another site that takes approx 800 faxes per day. Craig - Original Message - From: Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP?? Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I have had hundreds of complaints about spandsp reliability. I have analysed at least 50 or 60 audio logs. I have found maybe 5 or 6 which has real spandsp problems. The rest had frame slips. Of the 5 or 6 with real problems, most have been fixed in the latest version. I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. These HP machines really are total crap. I have workarounds in spandsp for several blatently wrong things they do. I don't yet know who is at fault with this latest problem. Regards, Steve Jeremy Melanson wrote: More like, I already have enough Digium cards, and I don't want purchase a bunch of fax/modems and more Digium cards than I alrady have. I have a PRI line that I'd like to support high-volume faxing on. I've gotten SpanDSP to work with * over the PRI, but I need a more reliability. That, and I guess I'm probably just being cheap too :-) - Jeremy On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 13:15 -0500, Anton Krall wrote: Maybe I started the day slow :) but let me see if I undertood correctly. You say that you don't want to rely on having to buy Digums or any other type of cards in oder to tie everything into spandsp and * but you would rather have dedicated PSTN lines with faxes on them? |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |I guess I didn't word this right. |It's not that SpanDSP ties up extensions, as it definitely |doesn't. I was more referring to the standard hardware-based |solutions out there that need to have a dedicated line for an |incoming fax. I need the ability to send and receive faxes |with a good amount of reliability, and would love to integrate |it with Asterisk. I'm just not keen on needing to buy a bunch |of Digium TDM cards just to support such a solution. | |Don't get me wrong, SpanDSP is great! I'm just looking for |something a little more enterprise-ready. | |On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 12:07 -0500, Eric Wieling aka ManxPower wrote: | I wasn't aware that SpanDSP tied up a bunch of extensions. | | Jeremy Melanson wrote: |I'm trying to see if anyone knows of an alternative solution, | commercial or non-commercial, to SpanDSP. I'm specifically looking |for another software-based, DSP fax that doesn't require me to add a tie up a | bunch of extensions on my PBX. | | Has anyone ever seen such an animal, or gotten such it to play nice | with Asterisk? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Damn. I'm using spandsp0.0.2pre15 and asterisk 1.0.7 with a single span card (US PRI) and I can get it to work about 85% of the time on a single 1 paged fax. I count a failed fax if any of the tiff images don't look like the original. I tried sending thru a 15 page fax. All 15 pages were received in the tiff image, but every 2 or 3 pages, it would seem as if the image skipped an inch. So instead of being 8.5 x 11, it was 8.5 x 10 (or 9). -Matthew From: Craig Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:51:22 +0800 To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP?? I agree with Steve on this, am piloting Spandsp 0.0.2pre15 on asterisk 1.0.7 with a TE405p, euroisdn. Fedora Core 2, kernel 2.6.9. Running on an old Dell Optiplex desktop PIII 450mhz with 256mb ram. Takes on average 350 faxes / day with just under 1% failed faxes. I define a failed fax as one with a filesize of 8bytes or won't render to pdf. On the strength of the pilot I am planning to install it to production at another site that takes approx 800 faxes per day. Craig - Original Message - From: Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP?? Why would you expect a bunch of fax modems to work any better than spandsp? If spandsp doesn't work reliably your system is very likely broken. I have had hundreds of complaints about spandsp reliability. I have analysed at least 50 or 60 audio logs. I have found maybe 5 or 6 which has real spandsp problems. The rest had frame slips. Of the 5 or 6 with real problems, most have been fixed in the latest version. I have one weird audio log from a new HP combination printer and fax machine that i haven't sorted out yet. These HP machines really are total crap. I have workarounds in spandsp for several blatently wrong things they do. I don't yet know who is at fault with this latest problem. Regards, Steve Jeremy Melanson wrote: More like, I already have enough Digium cards, and I don't want purchase a bunch of fax/modems and more Digium cards than I alrady have. I have a PRI line that I'd like to support high-volume faxing on. I've gotten SpanDSP to work with * over the PRI, but I need a more reliability. That, and I guess I'm probably just being cheap too :-) - Jeremy On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 13:15 -0500, Anton Krall wrote: Maybe I started the day slow :) but let me see if I undertood correctly. You say that you don't want to rely on having to buy Digums or any other type of cards in oder to tie everything into spandsp and * but you would rather have dedicated PSTN lines with faxes on them? |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |I guess I didn't word this right. |It's not that SpanDSP ties up extensions, as it definitely |doesn't. I was more referring to the standard hardware-based |solutions out there that need to have a dedicated line for an |incoming fax. I need the ability to send and receive faxes |with a good amount of reliability, and would love to integrate |it with Asterisk. I'm just not keen on needing to buy a bunch |of Digium TDM cards just to support such a solution. | |Don't get me wrong, SpanDSP is great! I'm just looking for |something a little more enterprise-ready. | |On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 12:07 -0500, Eric Wieling aka ManxPower wrote: | I wasn't aware that SpanDSP tied up a bunch of extensions. | | Jeremy Melanson wrote: |I'm trying to see if anyone knows of an alternative solution, | commercial or non-commercial, to SpanDSP. I'm specifically looking |for another software-based, DSP fax that doesn't require me to add a tie up a | bunch of extensions on my PBX. | | Has anyone ever seen such an animal, or gotten such it to play nice | with Asterisk? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 22:16 -0500, Matthew Boehm wrote: Damn. I'm using spandsp0.0.2pre15 and asterisk 1.0.7 with a single span card (US PRI) and I can get it to work about 85% of the time on a single 1 paged fax. I count a failed fax if any of the tiff images don't look like the original. I tried sending thru a 15 page fax. All 15 pages were received in the tiff image, but every 2 or 3 pages, it would seem as if the image skipped an inch. So instead of being 8.5 x 11, it was 8.5 x 10 (or 9). Sounds like frame slip/distortion... not that I am an expert, but I used to often get faxes like that until I got my PRI working properly... Check the usual for frame slips, lost interrupts, etc maybe consider adjusting the PCI latency on your cards Regards, Adam -- -- Adam Goryachev Website Managers Ph: +61 2 8304 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +61 2 9345 4396www.websitemanagers.com.au ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Hello all. I'm trying to see if anyone knows of an alternative solution, commercial or non-commercial, to SpanDSP. I'm specifically looking for another software-based, DSP fax that doesn't require me to add a tie up a bunch of extensions on my PBX. Has anyone ever seen such an animal, or gotten such it to play nice with Asterisk? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
I wasn't aware that SpanDSP tied up a bunch of extensions. Jeremy Melanson wrote: I'm trying to see if anyone knows of an alternative solution, commercial or non-commercial, to SpanDSP. I'm specifically looking for another software-based, DSP fax that doesn't require me to add a tie up a bunch of extensions on my PBX. Has anyone ever seen such an animal, or gotten such it to play nice with Asterisk? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
I guess I didn't word this right. It's not that SpanDSP ties up extensions, as it definitely doesn't. I was more referring to the standard hardware-based solutions out there that need to have a dedicated line for an incoming fax. I need the ability to send and receive faxes with a good amount of reliability, and would love to integrate it with Asterisk. I'm just not keen on needing to buy a bunch of Digium TDM cards just to support such a solution. Don't get me wrong, SpanDSP is great! I'm just looking for something a little more enterprise-ready. Jeremy On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 12:07 -0500, Eric Wieling aka ManxPower wrote: I wasn't aware that SpanDSP tied up a bunch of extensions. Jeremy Melanson wrote: I'm trying to see if anyone knows of an alternative solution, commercial or non-commercial, to SpanDSP. I'm specifically looking for another software-based, DSP fax that doesn't require me to add a tie up a bunch of extensions on my PBX. Has anyone ever seen such an animal, or gotten such it to play nice with Asterisk? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
Maybe I started the day slow :) but let me see if I undertood correctly. You say that you don't want to rely on having to buy Digums or any other type of cards in oder to tie everything into spandsp and * but you would rather have dedicated PSTN lines with faxes on them? |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of |Jeremy Melanson |Sent: Lunes, 25 de Abril de 2005 12:51 p.m. |To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion |Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP?? | |I guess I didn't word this right. |It's not that SpanDSP ties up extensions, as it definitely |doesn't. I was more referring to the standard hardware-based |solutions out there that need to have a dedicated line for an |incoming fax. I need the ability to send and receive faxes |with a good amount of reliability, and would love to integrate |it with Asterisk. I'm just not keen on needing to buy a bunch |of Digium TDM cards just to support such a solution. | |Don't get me wrong, SpanDSP is great! I'm just looking for |something a little more enterprise-ready. | | |Jeremy | |On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 12:07 -0500, Eric Wieling aka ManxPower wrote: | I wasn't aware that SpanDSP tied up a bunch of extensions. | | Jeremy Melanson wrote: |I'm trying to see if anyone knows of an alternative solution, | commercial | or non-commercial, to SpanDSP. I'm specifically looking |for another | software-based, DSP fax that doesn't require me to add a tie up a | bunch of extensions on my PBX. | | Has anyone ever seen such an animal, or gotten such it to |play nice | with Asterisk? | ___ | Asterisk-Users mailing list | Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com | http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users | To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: |http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users |___ |Asterisk-Users mailing list |Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com |http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users |To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: | http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users | ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
More like, I already have enough Digium cards, and I don't want purchase a bunch of fax/modems and more Digium cards than I alrady have. I have a PRI line that I'd like to support high-volume faxing on. I've gotten SpanDSP to work with * over the PRI, but I need a more reliability. That, and I guess I'm probably just being cheap too :-) - Jeremy On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 13:15 -0500, Anton Krall wrote: Maybe I started the day slow :) but let me see if I undertood correctly. You say that you don't want to rely on having to buy Digums or any other type of cards in oder to tie everything into spandsp and * but you would rather have dedicated PSTN lines with faxes on them? |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |I guess I didn't word this right. |It's not that SpanDSP ties up extensions, as it definitely |doesn't. I was more referring to the standard hardware-based |solutions out there that need to have a dedicated line for an |incoming fax. I need the ability to send and receive faxes |with a good amount of reliability, and would love to integrate |it with Asterisk. I'm just not keen on needing to buy a bunch |of Digium TDM cards just to support such a solution. | |Don't get me wrong, SpanDSP is great! I'm just looking for |something a little more enterprise-ready. | |On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 12:07 -0500, Eric Wieling aka ManxPower wrote: | I wasn't aware that SpanDSP tied up a bunch of extensions. | | Jeremy Melanson wrote: |I'm trying to see if anyone knows of an alternative solution, | commercial or non-commercial, to SpanDSP. I'm specifically looking |for another software-based, DSP fax that doesn't require me to add a tie up a | bunch of extensions on my PBX. | | Has anyone ever seen such an animal, or gotten such it to play nice | with Asterisk? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Alternatives to SpanDSP??
On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 17:07 -0400, Jeremy Melanson wrote: More like, I already have enough Digium cards, and I don't want purchase a bunch of fax/modems and more Digium cards than I alrady have. I have a PRI line that I'd like to support high-volume faxing on. I've gotten SpanDSP to work with * over the PRI, but I need a more reliability. That, and I guess I'm probably just being cheap too :-) OK, now you are finally making sense (to me :) Why not just (yeah, just) debug the issues you see, and try to have them fixed. From what I have seen on the list, most people seem to be able to use spandsp for faxing without a problem. It would be interesting to hear from someone regularly receive more than say 100 faxes per day from 'random' fax machines using spandsp? or better, some other large number per day :) Regards, Adam -- -- Adam Goryachev Website Managers Ph: +61 2 8304 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +61 2 9345 4396www.websitemanagers.com.au ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
