Can anyone connect to the repo to download RPM's or the ISO? http://sipxecs.sipfoundry.org/temp/sipXecs/main/CentOS/5/i386/RPM/repodata/repom d.xml: [Errno 4] IOError: <urlopen error (111, 'Connection refused')> Trying other mirror. Error: Cannot retrieve repository metadata (repomd.xml) for repository: sipxecs- unstable. Please verify its path and try again
Starting Nmap 4.20 ( http://insecure.org ) at 2009-04-27 16:31 PDT Interesting ports on 216.142.118.34: Not shown: 1695 closed ports PORT STATE SERVICE 22/tcp open ssh 53/tcp open domain Nmap finished: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 13.549 seconds [r...@dev-pbx ~]# nmap -sS sipxecs.sipfoundry.org -p 80 Starting Nmap 4.20 ( http://insecure.org ) at 2009-04-27 16:31 PDT Interesting ports on 216.142.118.34: PORT STATE SERVICE 80/tcp closed http On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:39 PM, <[email protected]>wrote: > Send sipx-users mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of sipx-users digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Admin interface inaccessible with 4.1.x ISO build (James R) > 2. Re: Admin interface inaccessible with 4.1.x ISO build (Grant Lang) > 3. Re: Citel (Alok Prasad) > 4. Re: ITSP Registration Issues (Tim Byng) > 5. Re: ITSP Registration Issues (M. Ranganathan) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: James R <[email protected]> > To: sipx users list <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:09:24 -0400 > Subject: [sipx-users] Admin interface inaccessible with 4.1.x ISO build > I have a successful 3.10.x system running and I want to get a feel for the > 4.x system. I tried installing two different versions of 4.1 from the > ISO's, and everything seemed to be a success according to the build, but > when I try to reach the admin interface via the IP address, it converts my > URL to https and adds the :8443/sipxconfig in my browser (as I would > expect), but then it fails saying it can't display the webpage. > > I've tried multiple PC's with multiple browsers, and all have the same > result. > > Am I missing something with the new 4.x system? > > thanks, > James > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Grant Lang <[email protected]> > To: James R <[email protected]>, sipx users list < > [email protected]> > Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 05:25:22 +1200 > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Admin interface inaccessible with 4.1.x ISO build > > Hi, > > > > There seems to be a java component missing out of the ISO images (I havent > been able to get to the site to see if this is still an issue with the > latest builds). > > > > *** for a fresh install this worked for me (and some others that I know > have the same problem)*** > > > > The fix that I implemented that worked for me: > > Start the installation and go through to the end of the first section which > sets up the network etc and DNS.. before you start the SipX section of the > setup jump into Putty and connect as you would normally. > > Assuming you are using the Centos single CD installation run this: > > wget -P /etc/yum.repos.d > http://sipxecs.sipfoundry.org/temp/sipXecs/sipxecs-unstable-centos.repo > > then edit the sipxecs-unstable-centos.repo file and change the $release > variable to 5 (I don't know why this doesn't work, it never has for me) and > change the gpgcheck from 1 to 0 so that you have this: > > [sipxecs-unstable] > > name=SIPfoundry sipXecs pbx - latest mainline version baseurl= > http://sipxecs.sipfoundry.org/temp/sipXecs/main/CentOS/5/$basearch/RPM > > gpgcheck=0 > > gpgkey=https://secure2.pingtel.com/RPM-GPG-KEY-pingtel > > enabled=1 > > > > What you have done now is added the unstable sources and you can add the > missing library/rpm file by: > > yum install sipxcommons > > Once that has installed then go back to the other screen and complete the > setup. > > Hope that helps > > > > Cheers > > Grant > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *James R > *Sent:* Tuesday, 28 April 2009 5:09 a.m. > *To:* sipx users list > *Subject:* [sipx-users] Admin interface inaccessible with 4.1.x ISO build > > > > I have a successful 3.10.x system running and I want to get a feel for the > 4.x system. I tried installing two different versions of 4.1 from the > ISO's, and everything seemed to be a success according to the build, but > when I try to reach the admin interface via the IP address, it converts my > URL to https and adds the :8443/sipxconfig in my browser (as I would > expect), but then it fails saying it can't display the webpage. > > > > I've tried multiple PC's with multiple browsers, and all have the same > result. > > > > Am I missing something with the new 4.x system? > > > > thanks, > James > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Alok Prasad <[email protected]> > To: [email protected], [email protected], > [email protected] > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 23:26:51 +0530 > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Citel > Absolutely it works great as a legacy System,I had used TVA with Asterisk > without any issue.Recently shifted to SipX > and a month back n did a interop test on TVA based on > http://interop.pingtel.com/ ,and found no issue at all ,no integration > problem.(Though i had to update > the recent firmware from citel).Most amazing feature is there key > mappings,i dont have to remember new keys. > > ________________________________________ > From: Picher, Michael [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 6:49 PM > To: Thames, Dean M.; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Citel > > I have just wondered how functional the phones will be. I doubt the system > will behave exactly as their legacy system did… pleasantly surprised if it > does though! > > From: Thames, Dean M. [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 8:47 AM > To: Picher, Michael; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [sipx-users] Citel > > Absolutely. We're still in discovery and it probalby won't be a universal > solution, but the value for us is in: > > 1. Migration without disrupting the cust...I can extend the same features > on the same buttons they're used to and their phone doesn't move. > 2. Migration without boxing/unboxing/labor...move xconnects in the IDF. The > cat-3 premise wiring will be there whether I use it or not. > 3. Migration without investing in new desktop hardware....phones are going > away; why buy new ones. Citel serves as a transitory path to soft apps. > 4. Squeezing a little more out of fully depreciated assets....I have > 1,000's of legacy tdm phones that my customers like, that will most likely > last at least five more years, and can get us to a converged uc/im/presence > type environment. > > Currently I'm registering my pilot users to Cisco CM, but that takes > licenses. The bet is that if I can register them to sipxecs or asterisk, > then I can bring them forward for under $100 a pop and they won't even > notice anything happened. Then the phones go away via normal attrition. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Picher, Michael [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 4:04 AM > To: Thames, Dean M.; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [sipx-users] Citel > I keep looking at this product and wonder why people ever do it… You are > stuck with TDM cabling, old phones and the Citel device costs like > $100/port. When you can by refurb Polycom 330’s for under $100 does this > product really make sense? > > My $0.02. > > Mike > > From: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Thames, Dean M. > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:30 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [sipx-users] Citel > > Hello, > Looking for some guidance on registering legacy Meridian phones on a Citel > TVA gateway to Sipxecs....Wondering if anyone has used these two products > together. Thanks, > Dean. > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: "Tim Byng" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:09:17 -0400 > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] ITSP Registration Issues > > OK so I retracted timeout interval a bit ( 5 sec. ) from the Expires > > interval of the ITSP reported in the OK to the Register. Please give > > r15269 a try and let me know if it solved anything. > > I had an issue applying the update so I reinstalled using the most recent > 4.0.x ISO. > > This resolved the second issue where sipXecs was trying to register shortly > after the registration expired. I connected to les.net and verified that > the > registration is now occurring about 5 seconds before the expiration. It > never shows that it's not registered and I cannot reproduce this issue > anymore. > > Unfortunately, the first issue still remains. After about 90 seconds, I can > no longer receive inbound calls. I have tried with sipXecs both behind the > firewall and on the DMZ. The calls are registered on les.net and are > showing > up as "NO ANSWER". > > To workaround this issue, I could always set the expiration to be less than > 90 seconds, but this would just be masking the problem. Please let me know > what you would like me to do next. > > Thanks! > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: "M. Ranganathan" <[email protected]> > To: Tim Byng <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:39:17 -0400 > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] ITSP Registration Issues > On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Tim Byng <[email protected]> wrote: > >> OK so I retracted timeout interval a bit ( 5 sec. ) from the Expires > >> interval of the ITSP reported in the OK to the Register. Please give > >> r15269 a try and let me know if it solved anything. > > > > I had an issue applying the update so I reinstalled using the most recent > > 4.0.x ISO. > > > > This resolved the second issue where sipXecs was trying to register > shortly > > after the registration expired. I connected to les.net and verified that > the > > registration is now occurring about 5 seconds before the expiration. It > > never shows that it's not registered and I cannot reproduce this issue > > anymore. > > > > Unfortunately, the first issue still remains. After about 90 seconds, I > can > > no longer receive inbound calls. I have tried with sipXecs both behind > the > > firewall and on the DMZ. The calls are registered on les.net and are > showing > > up as "NO ANSWER". > > > > To workaround this issue, I could always set the expiration to be less > than > > 90 seconds, but this would just be masking the problem. Please let me > know > > what you would like me to do next. > > > > Thanks! > > > I request you to do the following: > > 1. Set the log level on the SIP Trunking service to DEBUG. > 2. Set the log level on the Registrar to INFO > 3. Set the log level on the Proxy Server to INFO > 4. Configure the system so that the problem surfaces ( i.e. set the > timeout value to be 10 minutes ). > 5. Restart the services and exercise the system to demonstrate the problem. > 6. Get a log file capture using the following command : > sipx-snapshot > This will generate a tar.gz file. It will not contain any private > information (such as your account passwords). > > 7. Mail me the targ.gz file ( it will probably be too big to post on > the list ) or start an issue and attach the log file and alert the > list after you are done. > > I would like to see if les.net is returning a bad value on the Expires > timer or perhaps the problem is in the RegistrationManager of > sipxbridge computing a bad value. In either case I'd like to have a > look. > > Thanks! > > Ranga > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > sipx-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users > > Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users > > > > > > -- > M. Ranganathan > > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users > Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users >
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
