[Asterisk-Users] Receiving Multiple calls on asterisk at home
All - I've been muddling around with this for a few days now.. and I'm trying to figure out why I am not receiving more than one phone call on each polycom 501 phone. I can make more than one phone call out, but not receive another one in, while on a call. Has anybody seen this behaivior before, or is there something simple in the config i'm missing, like.. maxcalls.. or something. Thanks! Rolf Brusletto ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] Upgrading AAH
All - I've a new system, that since it's been in production, has seen a few issues, that look like they should be fixed by upgrading asterisk @ home to the latest version. I was curious if anybody out there can tell me their experiences with this, and what to expect. Thanks, Rolf Brusletto ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] Polycom 501 and single call only using AAH 2.2
Howdy - I've been noticing a problem where I only receive a single call, before other calls go to voicemail. This only happens when the user is on the phone. I have the polycom 501's setup for 2 lines per key and 2 line keys for the first registration, which should allow for multiple calls. Anybody have any ideas what is going on? thanks Rolf Brusletto ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] Issue w/ Polycom 501 phones in a queue...
Hey all - I haven't run into this problem before, so I'm a little confused as to why I'm seeing it now. I've been testing with Polycom 501's in a ringall queue situation, and everything seemed to be fine. Now, if I make a call into the queue, and let it ring a few rings, then pick it up, the other phones setup in the ring-all queue, will keep ringing, even though another phone has picked it up. .. I've googled for about a day and a half on this, and haven't found anything. I'm curious if anybody here has seen this type of issue before. I have a feeling it might be something with the polycom phones themselves, but I can't see anything out of line in my configs for them... Thanks in advance, Rolf Brusletto ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Bonded ethernet ports and *
Rich - Even though I mentioned ethernet failover, I might have made it still a little too broad. The linux ethernet bonding module has been around for years, and there are several modes the linux bonding module can use which include: mode=0 (balance-rr) Round-robin policy: Transmit packets in sequential order from the first available slave through the last. This mode provides load balancing and fault tolerance. mode=1 (active-backup) Active-backup policy: Only one slave in the bond is active. A different slave becomes active if, and only if, the active slave fails. The bond's MAC address is externally visible on only one port (network adapter) to avoid confusing the switch. This mode provides fault tolerance. The primary option affects the behavior of this mode. mode=2 (balance-xor) XOR policy: Transmit based on [(source MAC address XOR'd with destination MAC address) modulo slave count]. This selects the same slave for each destination MAC address. This mode provides load balancing and fault tolerance. mode=3 (broadcast) Broadcast policy: transmits everything on all slave interfaces. This mode provides fault tolerance. mode=4 (802.3ad) IEEE 802.3ad Dynamic link aggregation. Creates aggregation groups that share the same speed and duplex settings. Utilizes all slaves in the active aggregator according to the 802.3ad specification. What I was talking about was simply mode 1, active-backup. Some of our past equipment's network interfaces had some issues with link up/down which could only be traced back to the ethernet port itself, so using bonding to use two ports for active/backup failover works very smoothly. Our policy is 500ms mii monitor for link status, and then a wait of 500ms before actually failing over for a total of about 1s of possible down time. This also benefits us as we use redundant switches in our distribution layer so that if one of the switches goes down, it automatically switches over. My question was really more of the bonding module than anything else, and how much more overhead it puts on. Most of the other modes(except 0) typically require trunk ports or special switch setup, since my issues are not bandwidth related, I've stayed away from them. I'd agree that nics are the least concerning, but if you have an extra eth port, and aren't using it for something already, why not make it a failover port.. Best regards, Rolf On 12/13/05 4:14 PM, Rich Adamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey all - I'm sure this has been done before, but I'm curious about how well it works.. Typically we have all our servers setup for dual fast/gig ethernet failover... I.e. bond0 slaves eth0 and eth1 and fails over between the two. This together with dual p/s and raid1'd(at least) drives provides for a pretty safe solution(aside from building up a second server). So I'm courious thoughts/expectations/issues with doing network failover... Probably is a moot point, but I thought I'd ask. I've done profession network assessments for a large number of companies throughout the US and I've never ever seen bonded nics work as the implementor expected them to work. If you think seriously about how well the underlying OS and drivers function, the length of the code path that must be executed to move packets from the application layer all the way through to the nic card, you'll find that most OS's are pressed very hard to keep a 1 gig interface running at max smoke. Combine that with the overhead of tcp (not udp), latency, and the typical tcp windowing, and its even worse. I'd also be checking exactly how the bonding function works in the primary/backup arrangement as several implementations that I've seen do not handle shared mac addresses very well. That translates into arp table timeout issues that essentially negates the expected benefits (eg, session failures). Could there be some good implementations? Probably, but just haven't seen any persoanlly as yet. From a VoIP perspective, a 100 meg nic interface can (in theory) handle 1,176 simultanous g711 (or about 3,000 g729) conversations. That is significantly greater then what can be handled from a processing perspective (assuming all conversations pass through asterisk code). If all conversations essentially involves canreinvite=yes, a 100 meg nic is still not the bottleneck. Last, the bonding of two nics at the server level _requires_ the associated switch interface to support the exact same bonding algorithm. Historically, that has been a problem for many switch vendors. Short answer... I'd never do it. Long answer... think in terms of high availability systems; the nic card is the least concerning. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and
[Asterisk-Users] Bonded ethernet ports and *
Hey all - I'm sure this has been done before, but I'm curious about how well it works.. Typically we have all our servers setup for dual fast/gig ethernet failover... I.e. bond0 slaves eth0 and eth1 and fails over between the two. This together with dual p/s and raid1'd(at least) drives provides for a pretty safe solution(aside from building up a second server). So I'm courious thoughts/expectations/issues with doing network failover... Probably is a moot point, but I thought I'd ask. Thanks!! Rolf Brusletto Denver, Co. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] Teliax experiences
Howdy - This is my first post on the list, and from what I've seen of * I'm very impressed. I had a question regarding everybodys experience with Teliax or Broadvoice. I setup a Teliax trunk this morning, and had calls going out it in about 5 minutes(Had to get more coffee). Has anybody had any problems with them, outages, issues with dids etc?? Thanks, Rolf Brusletto Denver, Co. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] IAX2 Status monitoring
Knowing that my iax2 session with teliax should be up right now, I have an interesting question.. From the asterisk CLI, if I run iax2 show peers, I get the following: Name/UsernameHost Mask Port Status Teliax - Denver 208.139.204.232 (S) 255.255.255.255 4569 Unmonitored 1 iax2 peers [0 online, 0 offline, 1 unmonitored] I'm curious about the Status field. What exactly does unmonitored mean, and is there a way to change it to monitored? The iax2 connection is a Teliax connection. Thanks! Rolf Brusletto ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] IAX2 Status monitoring
That did it! Thanks! I would assume the 76ms is a latency number? Thanks! Rolf On 12/9/05 12:58 PM, Juan Janczuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can change it to monitored mode, changing the line qualify=no by qualify=yes in iax.conf. Hope this helps. Regards. Juan. -Mensaje original- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] nombre de Rolf Brusletto Enviado el: Viernes, 09 de Diciembre de 2005 04:40 p.m. Para: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Asunto: [Asterisk-Users] IAX2 Status monitoring Knowing that my iax2 session with teliax should be up right now, I have an interesting question.. From the asterisk CLI, if I run iax2 show peers, I get the following: Name/UsernameHost Mask Port Status Teliax - Denver 208.139.204.232 (S) 255.255.255.255 4569 Unmonitored 1 iax2 peers [0 online, 0 offline, 1 unmonitored] I'm curious about the Status field. What exactly does unmonitored mean, and is there a way to change it to monitored? The iax2 connection is a Teliax connection. Thanks! Rolf Brusletto ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/195 - Release Date: 08/12/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/195 - Release Date: 08/12/2005 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
