On Sunday 30 April 2006 10:27, Boris Bakchiev wrote:
Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy...
This may be a stupid question but how did you do this?
--
Cheers
Wayne
___
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
Asterisk-Users
On 5/2/06, Wayne Gemmell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy...
This may be a stupid question but how did you do this?
in your zaptel source dir (after making..): ./zttest -v
or search for zttest on voip-info.
cheers
On 4/30/06, Remco Barende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I e-mailed Dell support and asked them if it is possibel to assign a
unique IRQ to one of the three PCI slots.
Their reply was, not possible, you are ALWAYS sharing IRQ's, I guess this
is the reason for the poor results I'm seeing.
If you're
-Original Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:asterisk-users-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Anton Krall
Sent: Friday, 21 April 2006 14:27
To: 'Asterisk
Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users]
Digium cards, so disappointing !
Can you
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, Boris Bakchiev wrote:
I must say, spending just a little extra to get good hardware pays off
in the long run.
If you have any questions, email.
Wow, impressive results must say. Thanks for the specs and test results.
I had hoped that with the Dell 2850 I would
Our production asterisk server has TE411P and we route close to 50-70K
of calls per month through its ports.
We have NEVER EVER had any issues with faxing (close to 3k/month) with
faxes connected on one of the spans of the card.
Moreover, we have had quite a success receiving the faxes with
8:52 PM
|To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
|Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
|
|Our production asterisk server has TE411P and we route close
|to 50-70K of calls per month through its ports.
|We have NEVER EVER had any issues with faxing (close
2006/4/17, Nicholas Kathmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree with Lee.I have about 30 machines in production using iaxmodemand hylafax which work perfectly.Most are running off of T1s, but someare on TDM400 and TDM2400s.I only use IBM servers (which are about
twice the cost for the low end Dells), and
Olivier Krief wrote:
2006/4/17, Nicholas Kathmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree with Lee. I have about 30 machines in production using
iaxmodem
and hylafax which work perfectly. Most are running off of T1s,
but some
are on TDM400 and TDM2400s. I
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
On Monday 17 April 2006 07:44, Rich Adamson wrote:
I don't believe you will ever get POTS - FXO-TDM400P-to-anything to
work properly due to TDM card limitations. So, move all of those to the
bottom of your list.
I *had* this working.
POTS - TDM400
TDM400 -
Remco Barende wrote:
So, to document this, the likelihood of a fax working goes in this
order best to worse:
1. POTS - fax
2. POTS - FXO-TDM400P-FXS - fax
3. T1 - TE410P - channel bank - fax
4. T1 - TE110P - PCI - TE110P - channel bank - fax
5. T1 - TE110P - PCI -
On Monday 17 April 2006 07:44, Rich Adamson wrote:
I don't believe you will ever get POTS - FXO-TDM400P-to-anything to
work properly due to TDM card limitations. So, move all of those to the
bottom of your list.
I *had* this working.
POTS - TDM400
TDM400 - Real_honest_fax_machine
As I'd
Rich Adamson wrote:
I don't believe you will ever get POTS - FXO-TDM400P-to-anything to
work properly due to TDM card limitations. So, move all of those to
the bottom of your list.
If you pay close attention to those postings from the last two years
in which users say fax works, the
On Monday 17 April 2006 08:21, Lee Howard wrote:
I and other iaxmodem users can say fax works with analog PSTN
connections. In my case, as well as those others of which I am aware,
an X100P (clone, er winmodem) is being used.
Interesting. Do you have more information about your setup
Lee Howard wrote:
Rich Adamson wrote:
I don't believe you will ever get POTS - FXO-TDM400P-to-anything to
work properly due to TDM card limitations. So, move all of those to
the bottom of your list.
If you pay close attention to those postings from the last two years
in which users say fax
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
On Monday 17 April 2006 08:21, Lee Howard wrote:
I and other iaxmodem users can say fax works with analog PSTN
connections. In my case, as well as those others of which I am aware,
an X100P (clone, er winmodem) is being used.
Interesting. Do you have more
This is how we do faxing, and till now it has bee 100% accurate.
Incoming faxes are handled by chan_capi, using a cheap AVM fritz pci
card.
Outgoing fax is done with an old brother analog fax, connected to a
grandstream 285 (or whatever the number, it's their cheapest).
Asterisk connects
Michiel van Baak wrote:
This is how we do faxing, and till now it has bee 100% accurate.
Incoming faxes are handled by chan_capi, using a cheap AVM fritz pci
card.
Outgoing fax is done with an old brother analog fax, connected to a
grandstream 285 (or whatever the number, it's their
On Apr 16, 2006, at 2:07 PM, Steve Totaro wrote:
How many faxes a day do you average? If it is one a day for six
months then that is one thing. One hundred a day and I would say
that you definitely have a stable setup.
Yeah, only couple faxes a week.
So nothing huge here, but like I
On Sunday 16 April 2006 08:07, Steve Totaro wrote:
How many faxes a day do you average? If it is one a day for six months
then that is one thing. One hundred a day and I would say that you
definitely have a stable setup.
Does 14526 faxes to date (since 06 Jan 2006) count as stable? My setup
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
On Sunday 16 April 2006 08:07, Steve Totaro wrote:
How many faxes a day do you average? If it is one a day for six months
then that is one thing. One hundred a day and I would say that you
definitely have a stable setup.
Does 14526 faxes to date (since 06 Jan
On 15 Apr 2006, at 06:53, George Pajari wrote:
Kevin:
You wrote:
FAX transmission is massively more complex than modem
transmission. At
higher speeds, it involves 3 or 4 different 'carrier' frequencies and
signaling rate shifts, and these are done with very critical timing
requirements.
George Pajari wrote:
I'm sure you didn't quite mean to write what you have said above. Fax
transmission builds upon exactly the same ITU-T standards as data
transmission. For example, 33.6 kbps fax transmission (so called Super
G3) uses the same V.34 standard as 33.6 data modems. At slower
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Rusty Dekema wrote:
If this works, I don't see why a fax transmission wouldn't work. Is it
because the fax protocol doesn't have error correction? Is that even
true?
FAX transmission is massively more complex than modem transmission. At
higher speeds, it
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Jeff Gustafson wrote:
Is there any reason an easier implementation of the same, basic, idea
could be created for the Asterisk generation? According to a quick
search of H.100 it's just a TDM bus. It handles 2,048 full duplex
calls. Would a lightweight
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
What about a new line of Digium cards that have bridge cables that run
between the various cards and bypass the PCI bus? Since one of the best
aspects of using Asterisk is standards. This bridge cable should be
standardized and published so
So, to document this, the likelihood of a fax working goes in this
order best to worse:
1. POTS - fax
2. POTS - FXO-TDM400P-FXS - fax
3. T1 - TE410P - channel bank - fax
4. T1 - TE110P - PCI - TE110P - channel bank - fax
5. T1 - TE110P - PCI -
Hi Steve,
Thank you for your very enlightening message!
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Steve Underwood wrote:
[...]
modem it must be applied end to end by the modems themselves. The
real killer, though, is imperfect timing.
[...]
and its not always always available within
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Actually, I did. During a FAX transmission, there are many shifts to
different carriers and signaling rates as pages are transmitted and
acknowledged. It is _not_ as simple as a single carrier, like a normal
data modem connection. In addition to
Begumisa Gerald M wrote:
Hi Steve,
Thank you for your very enlightening message!
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Steve Underwood wrote:
[...]
modem it must be applied end to end by the modems themselves. The
real killer, though, is imperfect timing.
[...]
and its not always
Remco Barende wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Actually, I did. During a FAX transmission, there are many shifts to
different carriers and signaling rates as pages are transmitted and
acknowledged. It is _not_ as simple as a single carrier, like a normal
data modem
record the sound fax machines make when negotiating (specifically the part
where they try to negotiate anything above
9600 baud) and make a provision in asterisk (an extra letter added to the
Dial command?) that will make Asterisk monitor
the channel and listen for the fax nego sounds and have
Remco Barende wrote:
record the sound fax machines make when negotiating (specifically
the part where they try to negotiate anything above
9600 baud) and make a provision in asterisk (an extra letter added
to the Dial command?) that will make Asterisk monitor
the channel and listen for the fax
Hmm not so sure of that. I have an HP all-in-one thingy. It is not possible
to set the TX/RX speed hard in the config at a certain speed. Through the
developers menu in the beast it is possible to do this temporary.
Faxing at max 9600 bps works, anything higher fails miserably after the
Remco Barende wrote:
Hmm not so sure of that. I have an HP all-in-one thingy. It is not
possible to set the TX/RX speed hard in the config at a certain
speed. Through the developers menu in the beast it is possible to do
this temporary.
Faxing at max 9600 bps works, anything higher fails
Message -
From: Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
Remco Barende wrote:
Hmm not so sure of that. I have
At least Digium lets you wait in a queue and picks up the phone when
you call for support.. with Sangoma the only way to get ahold of
someone is to:
DIAL: 1-800-388-2475... choose option 2... get message no one is
available Press * to return to main menu. Dial extension 119. get
message no
PM
|To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
|Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
|
|
|I am so fed up with Digium cards. My company first owned a
|TE410P, I installed it in a Dell server and enjoyed its
|instability (we bought it months before Digium warned about
PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
|Lee Howard
|Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 7:22 PM
|To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
|Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
|
|Tony ROBIN wrote:
|
|Now we want to receive fax ( 20/day
: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
|
|*shrugs* Ya win some ya lose some. We've spent about 10 grand
|plus on Digium cards and have been pretty satisfied with ours
|:) Faxes have been working great for over 6 months and the
|cards work wonderfully in our Dell servers. They just need
Anton Krall wrote:
I must agree with you. I too buy Digium cards because I want to support the
development of asterisk. Asterisk is a great product but digum cards are a
pain, they say they don't support faxing but a lot of people that are
implementing asterisk demand or need faxin as a day to
have a great car but.. It cannot handle a car stereo :(
|-Original Message-
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
|Tony ROBIN
|Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 7:01 PM
|To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
|Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so
Anton Krall wrote:
Problem is, how to make sure you system WILL have 100% on zttest before
buying the cards.. You need to have stability, compatibility and certainty
that what you buy is going to work :(
Anybody had similar problems or success stories with sangoma cards?
Running zttest on my
On 4/14/06, Rich Adamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe the TDM2400 has the capability of doing on-card fxo-fxs data
flows (without hitting the pci bus), but that function has not yet been
implemented. Its basically required to support faxes in an analog
environment. When it is
Rusty Dekema wrote:
If this works, I don't see why a fax transmission wouldn't work. Is it
because the fax protocol doesn't have error correction? Is that even
true?
FAX transmission is massively more complex than modem transmission. At
higher speeds, it involves 3 or 4 different 'carrier'
Rusty Dekema wrote:
On 4/14/06, Rich Adamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe the TDM2400 has the capability of doing on-card fxo-fxs data
flows (without hitting the pci bus), but that function has not yet been
implemented. Its basically required to support faxes in an analog
environment.
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich
Adamson
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 8:37 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
Anton Krall wrote:
Problem is, how to make sure you
...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich
Adamson
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 8:37 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
Anton Krall wrote:
Problem
: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
|
|
|I am so fed up with Digium cards. My company first owned a
|TE410P, I installed it in a Dell server and enjoyed its
|instability (we bought it months before Digium warned about
|the incompatibility issues). Then we switched
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 13:49 -0300, Joshua Colp wrote:
Some people have problems, some people don't. There is no way you can be
prepared for every situation out there. We try our best.
I was looking at using a Dell server for running Asterisk and noticed
that Dell has started using
Jeff Gustafson wrote:
I was looking at using a Dell server for running Asterisk and noticed
that Dell has started using PCI-X on a lot of their new systems. Does
this newer bus standard help the situation with faxing?
No. PCI-X is just a wider/higher-speed version of PCI, not a new
Well, the TE410P and TE411P work in the PCI-X slots since it's backwards
compatible. So I guess in effect, the Digium's cards already do support
it :)
Aaron
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, Jeff Gustafson wrote:
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 13:49 -0300, Joshua Colp wrote:
Some people have problems, some
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:10 -0500, Aaron Daniel wrote:
Well, the TE410P and TE411P work in the PCI-X slots since it's backwards
compatible. So I guess in effect, the Digium's cards already do support
it :)
My fault. I meant to say PCI-e, which is a newer bus that Dell is
shipping
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:10 -0500, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Jeff Gustafson wrote:
I was looking at using a Dell server for running Asterisk and noticed
that Dell has started using PCI-X on a lot of their new systems. Does
this newer bus standard help the situation with faxing?
Jeff Gustafson wrote:
My fault. I meant to say PCI-e, which is a newer bus that Dell is
shipping on their server class machines.
Right. That is not supported by any Digium products yet, but it still
won't help the FAXing issue, since the issue is _not_ PCI bus bandwidth.
In fact, the
Jeff Gustafson wrote:
Is there any reason an easier implementation of the same, basic, idea
could be created for the Asterisk generation? According to a quick
search of H.100 it's just a TDM bus. It handles 2,048 full duplex
calls. Would a lightweight version that only supports 512
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:35 -0500, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Jeff Gustafson wrote:
My fault. I meant to say PCI-e, which is a newer bus that Dell is
shipping on their server class machines.
Right. That is not supported by any Digium products yet, but it still
won't help the FAXing
What do you mean Matt?
|-Original Message-
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
|Matt Riddell (IT)
|Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 7:53 AM
|To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
|Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so
|Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 8:19 AM
|To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
|Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
|
|I believe the TDM2400 has the capability of doing on-card
|fxo-fxs data flows (without hitting the pci bus), but that
|function has
Of
|Rich Adamson
|Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 8:37 AM
|To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
|Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
|
|Anton Krall wrote:
| Problem is, how to make sure you system WILL have 100% on zttest
| before buying the cards.. You
Kevin:
You wrote:
FAX transmission is massively more complex than modem transmission. At
higher speeds, it involves 3 or 4 different 'carrier' frequencies and
signaling rate shifts, and these are done with very critical timing
requirements.
I'm sure you didn't quite mean to write what you
I am so fed up with Digium cards. My company first owned a TE410P,
I installed it in a Dell server and enjoyed its instability (we
bought it months before Digium warned about the incompatibility
issues). Then we switched to a TE411P for the hardware echo
cancellation. Now we want to receive fax (
Buy Sangoma.
Good cards. Good support.
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, Tony ROBIN wrote:
I am so fed up with Digium cards. My company first owned a TE410P,
I installed it in a Dell server and enjoyed its instability (we
bought it months before Digium warned about the incompatibility
issues). Then we
*shrugs* Ya win some ya lose some. We've spent about 10 grand plus on
Digium cards and have been pretty satisfied with ours :) Faxes have been
working great for over 6 months and the cards work wonderfully in our Dell
servers. They just need more documentation on the different configuration
Tony ROBIN wrote:
Now we want to receive fax ( 20/day) on it and
guess what ? Since April 2006 (again a few months after we bought
our brand new card), officially, fax communications is not
supported with Digium cards ( http://www.voip-info.org/wiki-Asterisk+fax ).
Of course, I should have
65 matches
Mail list logo
