And a happy NEW YEAR.......(I will be in 2012 hours earlier then most of
you :o)
And a BIG thanks to Tony and Todd and Michel and Dale and George and
Joegen and Martin and all the others that provide answers and fixes.
I am grateful that they support this community, learn from these people.
BTW: Sometimes replies can hurt, but learning comes at a price, better a
painful answer then no answer,
get over the pain and learn from people that went through some pain to get
to a certain knowledge level.
BTW2: And now we know that VPRI is a stupid word for SIP-trunk, thanks for
the info.
Paul
>
>
> On Friday, December 30, 2011, Gerald Harper <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Yup realized right after I clicked send. Oh well. (can't we all just
get
> > along?)
> >
>
> Well let's see - on one hand we have Tony and Todd's contributions
> and replies to list that are very helpful without question (even
> sometimes they could hurt feelings). On the other hand you're
> watching the list and reply offline to others saying that it sucks
> and calls are dropped (btw is there any jira opened, trace collected
> so we could take a look at?) and you ended by not recommending
> SipXecs to customers. As a project contributor I don't feel this is
> the right attitude for an open source project and I encourage you to
> become active in reporting issues instead just watching mailing list
> and hope something it is solved
>
> Thanks
> George
>
>
>
> > On 12/29/2011 8:54 PM, Matthew Kitchin (usenet/public) wrote:
> >> Your post went to the list...
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Gerald Harper<[email protected]>
> >> Sender: [email protected]
> >> Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 20:51:36
> >> To:<[email protected]>; Discussion list for users of sipXecs
software<
> [email protected]>
> >> Reply-To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
> >> <[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication
> >>
> >> Off list (so as not to piss anyone off)... you are so right about how
> >> people are treated on this list. One of the reasons I stopped posting
> >> here and recommending sipx to customers. The other being the random
> >> dropped calls issue from two years ago, I follow the list only to see
if
> >> the problem has been fixed. Neither have IMHO.
> >>
> >> I hope it all works for you, and by the way I knew what you meant as
> >> soon as I read it.
> >>
> >> On 12/29/2011 8:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >>>> Sigh what? Mike, read about PRI -
> >>> Sigh... because you took the time to agree with Tony, giving me
> grief while at the same time pointing out that you were not doing
> that. Of course you were. Since Tony had already made his point, why
> did you need to bring it up again?
> >>>
> >>> You then post a separate reply to the original question when
> just before that, you told me you didn't know what I was talking about.
> >>>
> >>> Sigh because as soon as I point out the obvious such as I am now
> having to do, a few of you must at all costs have fun with this,
> turning the persons post into garbage making points like 'we need to
> understand'. Does someone else feel the need still?
> >>>
> >>> Of course you know what I was asking about, I've seen plenty of
> people talking about virtual PRI's. Who the heck would not know that
> a VPRI might simply be an abbreviation. Doesn't seem to be at the
> moment but give it time maybe :).
> >>>
> >>> Bottom line is that there are a few old timers on this list that
> seem to feel the need to be hard nosed to people. Why? Maybe a few
> of the users are simply too freaking serious for no good reason.
> Give it a rest. There is no reason to be like that with ANYONE on this
list.
> >>> No one makes you reply to anything, you don't have to. If you
> don't like how someone posts something, it's not your place to be
> the teacher or know it all and tell them how they need to learn
> everything about VoIP before ever taking the chance of using the
> wrong term while asking a question. God forbid!
> >>>
> >>>> That's all I'm saying, and I think that is
> >>>> what Tony was asking - what is it exactly.
> >>> A virtual PRI is really just a billing method for a SIP trunk.
> Figured pretty much anyone on this list would know that.
> >>> The question really was, how do I set up sipx so that I can use
> IP authentication to the ITSP over user/password.
> >>>
> >>> Anyways, moving on...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: [email protected]
> >>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> >>>> [email protected]
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 7:08 PM
> >>>> To: sipx-users
> >>>> Subject: Re: [sipx-users] flowroute VPRI IP authentication
> >>>>
> >>>> <sigh>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:55:11 -0800, Todd Hodgen wrote:
> >>>>> Yes, but what is a virtual PRI? Since PRI is an ISDN standard,
what is
> >>>> the
> >>>>> non-standard derivative that comes out of a Virtual PRI? What is
it
> >>>>> exactly?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is it maybe a PRI that is fed out of device that is actually
> fed via a T1
> >>>>> with SIP _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
