Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 using a 2850, you can disable the onboard NIC2, it's sharing its IRQ with 1 PCI slot. Just find out wich one. The other PCI slots share with 2 devices. By doing this I have also gotten very good results on a Dell 2850. cheers. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
Opened pseudo zap interface, measuring accuracy... 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.987793% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% --- Results after 111 passes --- Best: 100.00 -- Worst: 99.987793 -- Average: 99.999015 Server Specs: Asus P5WD2 Premium Pentium D 830 (Dual Core) Corsair DDR2-6400 2GB RAM (4 pices) 2xSATA2 RAID (linux software mirroring) TE406P (not TE411P as I stated before) Running debian with non-debian kernel (stock standard 2.6.15.4, email if you want .config ) Some anomalies have been observed during the testing of the server before implementing it into production. 1 The server performed MUCH better with software RAID one then hardware, not so mention it was easier to setup. 2 DDR2-6400 improved some of the benchmarks over DDR2-5200. My understanding that all samples that come in and out if Digium card are copied to user space so faster ram should be of benefit to the system. The system has not been restarted from December. Only asterisk was upgraded 3-4 times since December. Before unloading zaptel drivers we checked for IRQ misses with zttool (before each unload/load of drivers) and since December we had none. The system is now running realtime (mysql on the same machine), iaxmodem+hylafax combo for receiving faxes. I must say, spending just a little extra to get good hardware pays off in the long run. If you have any questions, email. Boris -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 send the output of zttest ? Whats your average and what kind of hardware are you using? That will give people pointers of what to use/expect. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 have bought a decent piece of hardware, it isn't. 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. I will try to find a solution. Thanks again! Remco ___ --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] 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 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 iaxmodem+hylafax thanks to Lee Howard that we're now gradually switching the fax machines to iaxmodem+hylafax combo. Faxes are sensitive to timing and configuration settings of your asterisk. Once your system is tuned to perfection you should have no problems faxing at all despite the official stance from Digium. issues). Then we switched to a TE411P for the hardware echo cancellation. 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 ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
Can you send the output of zttest ? Whats your average and what kind of hardware are you using? That will give people pointers of what to use/expect. |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of |Boris Bakchiev |Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 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 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 |iaxmodem+hylafax thanks to Lee Howard that we're now gradually |switching |the fax machines to iaxmodem+hylafax combo. | |Faxes are sensitive to timing and configuration settings of |your asterisk. |Once your system is tuned to perfection you should have no |problems faxing at all despite the official stance from Digium. | | | issues). Then we switched to a TE411P for the hardware echo | cancellation. 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 |___ |--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
Re: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 have never had to resolve anIRQ problem.I just looked up the hylafax usage reports on those peoplerunning the analog FXOs, and one of them had 390 pages in the last week, only one error, which I would consider acceptable.Thanks,Nick1. Do you mean Hylafax and Asterisk are installed on the machine and share the same TDM cards ?2. If positive, do you have any extension which is used for both voice and fax ? For instance, user Alice receives voice or fax calls on its own extension. When it's a fax, your server detects it and and let Hylafax get the call.CheersOlivier ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 only use IBM servers (which are about twice the cost for the low end Dells), and have never had to resolve an IRQ problem. I just looked up the hylafax usage reports on those people running the analog FXOs, and one of them had 390 pages in the last week, only one error, which I would consider acceptable. Thanks, Nick 1. Do you mean Hylafax and Asterisk are installed on the machine and share the same TDM cards ? 2. If positive, do you have any extension which is used for both voice and fax ? For instance, user Alice receives voice or fax calls on its own extension. When it's a fax, your server detects it and and let Hylafax get the call. Cheers Olivier Both hylafax and * are on the same machine and using the same PSTN interfaces (whether T1 or TDM). It uses iaxmodem to communicate between the two systems (imagine a softmodem). I'll create separate extensions for the iaxmodems, then either map the numbers (or channels off the TDM cards) to dial those extensions. You can also use the fax extension on your default incoming to dial the iaxmodem. Faxgetty then listens to the iaxmodem to receive faxes, and uses hylafax to send them to the appropriate email addresses, printers, etc. In most cases I'll set up separate PSTN numbers for incoming faxes, but the fax extension also works relatively well. The only time I've ever seen problems with faxes (or modems) is when trying to use a SIP or IAX provider over the internet. To connect the analog fax machines I'll either use a linksys PAP2 or Sipura SPA-2100. I used to use Grandstreams for that, but now find that they just randomly unregister themselves and have to be restarted before reconnecting. To do the scenario with both on the same extension, it would just be as follows: [incoming] s,1,However you handle your calls fax,1,Dial(IAX2/your iaxmodem extension) Thanks, Nick ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 - Real_honest_fax_machine As I'd posted several times already. I have not been able to repeat this success, though. Same boat here. Certainly wish there was something that we could do to make it work as obviously there is a large market for the soho businesses that also need fax capability. R. ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 - TDM400P-FXS - fax 6. T1 - TE110P - PCI - Ethernet/IP - IAXy - fax 7. FXO-TDM400P - PCI - Ethernet/IP - IAXy - fax Is this a correct? If it's not a PCI problem then there shouldn't be much of a difference between options 3 and 4. If it's a card issue then it would be nice to know which T1 cards handle fax better than others. Yes, BUT!!! be aware that if you have an E1 pri from your telco a T1 channel bank will not help anything. In this case (your option 3) native bridging will be possible and asterisk will have to transcode giving you the some problems again. 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 majority of them (if not all) are based on either a T1/E1 pstn connection, or, another piece of external hardware that causes fax transmissions to bypass the TDM card. ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 posted several times already. I have not been able to repeat this success, though. If you pay close attention to those postings from the last two years in which users say fax works, the majority of them (if not all) are based on either a T1/E1 pstn connection, or, another piece of external hardware that causes fax transmissions to bypass the TDM card. Correct. -A. ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 majority of them (if not all) are based on either a T1/E1 pstn connection, or, another piece of external hardware that causes fax transmissions to bypass the TDM card. 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. Lee. ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 (asterisk and zaptel versions, iaxmodem version, configuration for each, etc.)? I wouldn't mind trying iaxmodem on FXS with the TDM400... -A. ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 works, the majority of them (if not all) are based on either a T1/E1 pstn connection, or, another piece of external hardware that causes fax transmissions to bypass the TDM card. 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. Lee. 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 only use IBM servers (which are about twice the cost for the low end Dells), and have never had to resolve an IRQ problem. I just looked up the hylafax usage reports on those people running the analog FXOs, and one of them had 390 pages in the last week, only one error, which I would consider acceptable. Thanks, Nick ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 information about your setup (asterisk and zaptel versions, iaxmodem version, configuration for each, etc.)? Currently *I'm* using Asterisk 1.2.3 and zaptel 1.2.2, but others are using many variety of versions, both older and newer. I've used every version of iaxmodem. :-) I would be happy to share my configuration files with everyone, but all of it is really quite bland... mostly default configs for everything. Lee. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 the fax ata to the avm card (dial(capi/g1/) We are running this setup for almost 6 months now and we never missed a fax, nor have we ever heard from ppl receiving our faxes that it was bad. Just my experience. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 cheapest). Asterisk connects the fax ata to the avm card (dial(capi/g1/) We are running this setup for almost 6 months now and we never missed a fax, nor have we ever heard from ppl receiving our faxes that it was bad. Just my experience. 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. Thanks, Steve ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 said, not a single failure in 6 months now. We don't do a lot of faxes, almost everything is done by email these days. greetz, Michiel PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 is Canon IR5000 and Xerox C3545 attached to Adit600 FXS ports in a TE405, hopping over a 1-hop dedicated-to-VOIP SDSL link to a second Asterisk box, which is connected to a Bell Canada PRI. We get the odd failed fax, but it's generally due to the craptastic Canon and Xerox fax implementations. Both seem notorious for mostly-working. -A. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 2006) count as stable? My setup is Canon IR5000 and Xerox C3545 attached to Adit600 FXS ports in a TE405, hopping over a 1-hop dedicated-to-VOIP SDSL link to a second Asterisk box, which is connected to a Bell Canada PRI. We get the odd failed fax, but it's generally due to the craptastic Canon and Xerox fax implementations. Both seem notorious for mostly-working. Sounds stable to me! Moving this to my Important Asterisk Posts folder. I guess I could expect the same results with an adtran. Thanks, Steve ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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. 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 speeds, fax modems use a half-duplex standard that is less complex than that used by full duplex modems running at the same speed. If there is a problem with Digium hardware handling fax signals it cannot be laid at the purported massively more complex signalling of fax transmissions. I think it is more an issue of being massively more complex to support than 'pure' data e.g. a few data channels on a T1 . I don't think the comparison was with analog modems. The problem (as I see it) is that there are some tricky compromises to be made when engineering a system like Asterisk. The Asterisk developers have concentrated on their main aim - Voice over IP - and engineering decisions are made based on that. Humans can't hear small phase shifts, but they can hear latency, so asterisk is optimized to try and reduce latency at the cost of some (possible) phase shifts. Fax machines (and V34 modems) can't cope with phase shifts, but can (probably) cope with a bit more latency - if it is constant. In my view, it would be possible to re-engineer the channel and jitterbuffer code to support fax and V34 by tuning it to do (just) that. The amount of work involved would be huge and almost certainly not worth it. Tim Panton [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 speeds, fax modems use a half-duplex standard that is less complex than that used by full duplex modems running at the same speed. 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 those shifts occurring, they are very strictly timed and must occur within fairly short windows. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 involves 3 or 4 different 'carrier' frequencies and signaling rate shifts, and these are done with very critical timing requirements. What complete and utter rubbish, except the last bit - all types of fast modem, FAX included, demand perfect timing. Yes, error correction is available, but it just means that sending FAXes over a lousy connection will take a very long time, instead of failing completely. This is accurate, though. FAX is generally *less* demanding of channel quality than other fast modems, because it never operates in duplex mode (some Super G3 faxing excepted). It just sends one way at a time. All modems hate going into a digitized FXS/FXO port and back out another FXS/FXO port, since every time the signal goes through an analogue-digital-analogue cycle it gets corrupted a little bit more. V.90 will never work. V.34 will rarely work. However, the V.17 and V.29 modems usually used for FAXing tend to survive one cycle of this OK. More than one cycle (e.g. both FAX machines going through these analogue-digital-analogue cycles at the customer premises) is usually a recipe for failure. If the FXS/FXO ports are of poor quality, they can introduce enough distortion to cause trouble. Applying echo cancellation can also cause substantial distortion, and must be avoided for modem calls, including FAX ones. If echo cancellation is needed for a duplex modem it must be applied end to end by the modems themselves. The real killer, though, is imperfect timing. Normal telephone calls suffer clicks, and pops, and hiss, and buzzing, and all sorts of other crap. However, they never never never dilate time. The one thing you can guarantee on a properly functioning PSTN path is flawless timing. Any modem faster than the good old V.21 300bps modems from the 50's demands perfect timing. Guaranteed perfect timing is never available with VoIP, and its not always always available within a PC. PCs are designed around best efforts handling of data. They don't handle continuous streaming of media well, even if the data rate is fairly low. They handle it especially badly if latency must be kept low, as is the case with something as interactive as voice and modem calls. That said, a well design PC environment can achieve the timing needed for FAX calls, as long as you don't load it up too much. It might not be guaranteed perfect, in the way the PSTN is. However, if a timing hiccup only occurs a couple of times a day, timing issues are not going to screw up many calls. The problem for many people using cards like the TDM400 is hiccups are occuring all the time. They are audible in voice calls, though most people are undemanding enough not to complain or even notice. FAX just won't work. If you use spandsp + rxfax there is currently no FAX error correction. A hiccup kills the call. If you use spandsp + iaxmodem + hylafax, hylafax provides error correction, but the call time may become very long, with much retrying. If you use a FAX machine plugged into an FXS port, results vary. Regards, Steve ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 version that only supports 512 or 256 calls be any cheaper? It's doubtful. The issues are the cables and connectors are not cheap, and getting the boards to pass EMI and other certifications would be more complex. In addition, it means every board now has to have support for a super-speed TDM bus, even if it's only a 4-port analog interface card, and it also needs onboard logic to be able to map channels around. That would increase the card cost quite a bit, even for people that have no desire to use this method of connection. Rubbish. The 2 buses which preceeded H.100 - SC-BUS and MVIP - *were* basically cheaper and simpler versions of H.100. They used ordinary cheapo ribbon cable and header connectors, rather than the finer geometry cabling used by H.100. The logic needed for them is pretty simple - each bus was implemented in a pretty standard and not too complex ASIC, which all the vendors used. It didn't cost much to add MVIP or SC-BUS to a card, and those buses could handle 512 channels. They used multiple 2Mbps E1-like lanes, so they didn't require any super high speed operation. Any old TDM bus card - even a 4 channel one - should have no problem fitting in with and MVIP world. Regards, Steve ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 that other companies can adopt the standard. For example an ISDN card could bridge to a Digium T1 card. Or a card that supported legacy digital phones could bridge to other cards. That is called H.100, and it has existed for many years. It's also ludicrously expensive to implement, so you won't see it on Digium cards any time soon :-) I heard that Junghanns is working on such an interconnection. It is already possible to connect their PRI cards, and they are working on BRI-PRI. I ise their bristuff for an HFC-S BRI card and am not happy at all with the way they implemented timing, without applying the florz patch I have lots of problems (lockups, lost line etc.) My hesitation is with the driver, I think florz only fixes HFC-S if I would run into similar trouble with PRI I would be in deep trouble. But it would certainly fix faxing. I have now ordered a TE210P and will try native bridging using a legacy PBX for my faxing. I hope this will solve my faxing nightmares. (I don't care if a solution costs money, it just needs to work). I think it would be a good idea if Digium would put some articles about fax and possible solutions or work-arounds to fax problems on their website. ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 - TDM400P-FXS - fax 6. T1 - TE110P - PCI - Ethernet/IP - IAXy - fax 7. FXO-TDM400P - PCI - Ethernet/IP - IAXy - fax Is this a correct? If it's not a PCI problem then there shouldn't be much of a difference between options 3 and 4. If it's a card issue then it would be nice to know which T1 cards handle fax better than others. Yes, BUT!!! be aware that if you have an E1 pri from your telco a T1 channel bank will not help anything. In this case (your option 3) native bridging will be possible and asterisk will have to transcode giving you the some problems again. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 a PC. PCs are designed around best efforts handling of data. They don't handle continuous streaming of media well, even if the data rate is fairly low. They handle it especially badly if latency must be kept low, as is the case with I have come to understand and appreciate this fact more and more through painful experience. [...] That said, a well design PC environment can achieve the timing needed for FAX calls, as long as you don't load it up too much. In your opinion, short of re-engineering the PC, is there anything that can be done to step up the timing accuracy (and hence up the real-time performance) of the PC? What [hardware-based] technical action would you think can up the real-time performance of the PC? Regards, Gerald. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 those shifts occurring, they are very strictly timed and must occur within fairly short windows. Hi Kevin, I think the biggest problem is that almost any more modern fax machine persistently tries to connect at the highest possible speed. To solve the problem I suggested a workaround to this earlier on the list, no idea if it is technically possible or dfficult to implement, this is what I 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 nego sounds and have Asterisk distort or mute the audio. This way all fax machines would be forced to lower their speeds. I suspect that such a solution would greatly improve reliability for faxing without the need for drastic changes in the way asterisk works. If you could lower the speed further down to 4800 or even 2400 baud that might even be an interesting option. Instead of faxing at 9600 or 14k4 through a normal (expensive) landline it could be cheaper to fax even at 2400 baud via a voip line depending on where you need to fax to. None of my fax machines are able to reduce their TX/RX speeds, if any devices capable of capping the speed it would be a nice addition to the wiki, I would instantly buy some all-in-one machines that could do that The lower connection speeds wouldn't bother me, reliable faxing would make up for the lost connection speed! ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 always available within a PC. PCs are designed around best efforts handling of data. They don't handle continuous streaming of media well, even if the data rate is fairly low. They handle it especially badly if latency must be kept low, as is the case with I have come to understand and appreciate this fact more and more through painful experience. [...] That said, a well design PC environment can achieve the timing needed for FAX calls, as long as you don't load it up too much. In your opinion, short of re-engineering the PC, is there anything that can be done to step up the timing accuracy (and hence up the real-time performance) of the PC? What [hardware-based] technical action would you think can up the real-time performance of the PC? There are certainly some things that should be been done with the telephony cards. Right now they don't sync together. That's true for all the non-H.100/non-SC-BUS/non-MVIP cards I know of. If you have all your E1s/T1s on one board you can route from one to another with clean timing. If they are on different cards the only way they will have matching timing is if they are both slaving to the outside world, and the outside world is keeping them in sync (e.g. directly or indirectly they are both synced to the PSTN). Right now there is no possibility to sync, say, an E1 port to an FXS port. That means the cards are incapable of things like reliable FAXing from an TE405 port to an analogue FAX machine on a TDM400 port. The clocks could be carried between cards, using a simple mezzanine two wire cable, to keep them all in sync. It was short sighted of people not to do this. Regards, Steve ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 connection. In addition to those shifts occurring, they are very strictly timed and must occur within fairly short windows. Hi Kevin, I think the biggest problem is that almost any more modern fax machine persistently tries to connect at the highest possible speed. The only place speed is an issue is when someone tries to use V.34 Super G3 FAX through an analogue-digital-analogue path. Otherwise, if a path works for V.29 is should certainly work for V.17. These things are not failing because of the modem speed. If the modem cannot be carried by the path, FAX machines negotiate the speed downwards, anyway. To solve the problem I suggested a workaround to this earlier on the list, no idea if it is technically possible or dfficult to implement, this is what I 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 nego sounds and have Asterisk distort or mute the audio. This way all fax machines would be forced to lower their speeds. Complex, clunky, and solves nothing. I suspect that such a solution would greatly improve reliability for faxing without the need for drastic changes in the way asterisk works. If you could lower the speed further down to 4800 or even 2400 baud that might even be an interesting option. Instead of faxing at 9600 or 14k4 through a normal (expensive) landline it could be cheaper to fax even at 2400 baud via a voip line depending on where you need to fax to. The V.27ter modem used for 4800bps FAXing (2400 is not a supported speed for G3 FAX) is no more or less demanding than V.29 or V.17 in this context. It will work with worst line distortion, but that is not a problem we have in Asterisk. None of my fax machines are able to reduce their TX/RX speeds, if any devices capable of capping the speed it would be a nice addition to the wiki, I would instantly buy some all-in-one machines that could do that Actually, they are all able to reduce their speed when they need to. They figure out for themselves what the path is capable of. Often in a slightly quirky way, but bugs are the mainstay of the FAX industry. The lower connection speeds wouldn't bother me, reliable faxing would make up for the lost connection speed! Regards, Steve ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 Asterisk distort or mute the audio. This way all fax machines would be forced to lower their speeds. Complex, clunky, and solves nothing. 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 second or third page. None of my fax machines are able to reduce their TX/RX speeds, if any devices capable of capping the speed it would be a nice addition to the wiki, I would instantly buy some all-in-one machines that could do that Actually, they are all able to reduce their speed when they need to. They figure out for themselves what the path is capable of. Often in a slightly quirky way, but bugs are the mainstay of the FAX industry. Indeed but asking HP to implement a cap on the TX/RX speeds is like talking to a brick wall. I guess we will have to look for alternative solutions! ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 nego sounds and have Asterisk distort or mute the audio. This way all fax machines would be forced to lower their speeds. Complex, clunky, and solves nothing. 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 second or third page. This doesn't make sense. The known problems are all timing related, and 9600 (I presume you mean V.29 at 9600) is no more or less sensitive to timing slips than V.17. Actually, on a poor line V.17 at 9600bps should perform considerably better than V.29 at 9600bps. Can you tell me your exact setup? There must be something else wrong. Steve ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 second or third page. This doesn't make sense. The known problems are all timing related, and 9600 (I presume you mean V.29 at 9600) is no more or less sensitive to timing slips than V.17. Actually, on a poor line V.17 at 9600bps should perform considerably better than V.29 at 9600bps. Can you tell me your exact setup? There must be something else wrong. I tried lots of different settings but none really seemed to help. The line is ISDN BRI with an HFC-S card. Software is bristuff with florz patch. Echo can, silence suppr. etc all disabled. The HP is connected to a Sipura SPA 2000 with the correct settings for fax and the region i'm in. Still consistently faxes fail after the first or second page. The HP is a LaserJet 3330 mfp. Setting it back 9600 did help a bit. I solved the problem now by connecting an old Digital - Analog converter to the BRI line, bypassing Asterisk. Thanks! ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 miserably after the second or third page. This doesn't make sense. The known problems are all timing related, and 9600 (I presume you mean V.29 at 9600) is no more or less sensitive to timing slips than V.17. Actually, on a poor line V.17 at 9600bps should perform considerably better than V.29 at 9600bps. Can you tell me your exact setup? There must be something else wrong. I tried lots of different settings but none really seemed to help. The line is ISDN BRI with an HFC-S card. Software is bristuff with florz patch. Echo can, silence suppr. etc all disabled. The HP is connected to a Sipura SPA 2000 with the correct settings for fax and the region i'm in. Still consistently faxes fail after the first or second page. The HP is a LaserJet 3330 mfp. Setting it back 9600 did help a bit. I solved the problem now by connecting an old Digital - Analog converter to the BRI line, bypassing Asterisk. The Sipura is probably the problem. FoIP doesn't generally work for a number of reasons. Packet loss and jitter are just two of them. See http://www.soft-switch.org/foip.html and http://www.soft-switch.org/foip-with-real-atas.html for some others. Regards, Steve ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
I have so far found 2 ATA's that seem to be able to handle FAX reasonably well. The first one is the Grandstream ATA-286 (firmware up to 1.0.6.7, have not tried any firmware later than this), I have used these at multiple customer sites and no one has ever reported problems. They handle G3 faxing ok. Where I work we also use an analog modem connected to one and we get reliable 42k connects. On the asterisk side of things we use PRI (TE110p, TE410p, TE210p). The grtandstreams are plug and go, just disable the t.38 support. The other ATA that I have found to be able to perform faxing is the Linksys PAP2NA, however the configuration is more complex and it doesn't seem to handle G3 or analog modems. I'd recommend the Grandstream as your best chance of successful faxing in an asterisk setting where asterisk has an ISDN connection to the PSTN. Craig - Original 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 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 second or third page. This doesn't make sense. The known problems are all timing related, and 9600 (I presume you mean V.29 at 9600) is no more or less sensitive to timing slips than V.17. Actually, on a poor line V.17 at 9600bps should perform considerably better than V.29 at 9600bps. Can you tell me your exact setup? There must be something else wrong. I tried lots of different settings but none really seemed to help. The line is ISDN BRI with an HFC-S card. Software is bristuff with florz patch. Echo can, silence suppr. etc all disabled. The HP is connected to a Sipura SPA 2000 with the correct settings for fax and the region i'm in. Still consistently faxes fail after the first or second page. The HP is a LaserJet 3330 mfp. Setting it back 9600 did help a bit. I solved the problem now by connecting an old Digital - Analog converter to the BRI line, bypassing Asterisk. The Sipura is probably the problem. FoIP doesn't generally work for a number of reasons. Packet loss and jitter are just two of them. See http://www.soft-switch.org/foip.html and http://www.soft-switch.org/foip-with-real-atas.html for some others. Regards, Steve ___ --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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 one is available Press *, Dial 119, Press *, Dial 119... lather rinse and repeat until someone answers. On 4/13/06, Lee Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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 guessed that it is far too much to ask to a $2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just there to push us to the competing products ? If your zttest has good results (mostly 100%, nothing less than 99.98%) then you should be able to receive faxes (I'd suggest iaxmodem+HylaFAX) despite Digium's disclaimer. I do not excuse Digium, however, from sidelining fax the way that they have. Lee. ___ --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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 day service on their PBX's. Sad to see that faxing is nearly impossible on digium cards. To me is like saying here you 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 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 to a TE411P for |the hardware echo cancellation. 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 guessed that it is far too much to |ask to a $2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just |there to push us to the competing products ? | |We hesitated to buy another Digium card after the problems |with TE410P, but I told myself it was nice to support Asterisk |by buying some Digium cards. Now Digium make us regret our |buys and a disappointed customer is a lost customer forever... |Too sad... |___ |--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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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? |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL 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) 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 guessed that it is far too much to ask to a |$2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just there to push us |to the competing products ? | | |If your zttest has good results (mostly 100%, nothing less |than 99.98%) then you should be able to receive faxes (I'd |suggest iaxmodem+HylaFAX) despite Digium's disclaimer. | |I do not excuse Digium, however, from sidelining fax the way |that they have. | |Lee. | |___ |--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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
Aaron, have you tried using 1 te110p and 2 tdm04b on the same server? |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of |Aaron Daniel |Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 7:19 PM |To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion |Subject: Re: [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 |more documentation on the different configuration options you |can pass on load... I think the only problems we've really had |are configuration related, or bad hardware on our part, oh, |and a server room fry that took out more than just the |Asterisk servers :-P | |Aaron | |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 switched to a TE411P for the hardware echo | cancellation. 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 guessed that it is far too much to ask | to a $2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just there | to push us to the competing products ? | | We hesitated to buy another Digium card after the problems with | TE410P, but I told myself it was nice to support Asterisk by | buying some Digium cards. Now Digium make us regret our buys and | a disappointed customer is a lost customer forever... Too sad... | ___ | --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 | | |-- |Aaron Daniel |Computer Systems Technician |Sam Houston State University |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |(936) 294-4198 |___ |--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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 day service on their PBX's. Sad to see that faxing is nearly impossible on digium cards. To me is like saying here you have a great car but.. It cannot handle a car stereo :( Is this not possibly also related to the patenting issues on the email to fax gateways? -- Cheers, Matt Riddell ___ http://www.sineapps.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html) http://freevoip.gedameurope.com (Free Asterisk Voip Community) http://www.sineapps.com/rssfeed.php (Daily Asterisk News - rss) ___ --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] 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 not yet been implemented. Its basically required to support faxes in an analog environment. When it is implemented, that card should work. The TDM400 card will not work in 99% of the deployments. Faxing via T1 cards is known to work in a fairly large number of deployments, but its likely to be highly dependent on exactly where the fax machine is located relative to *. Eg, incoming pstn fax via a T1 that is expected to be switched to a sip ata adapter has lots of technical and specific infrastructure dependencies that have to be addressed by the implementor / engineer. The plug-n-play approach will have a very high failure rate. 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 day service on their PBX's. Sad to see that faxing is nearly impossible on digium cards. To me is like saying here you 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 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 to a TE411P for |the hardware echo cancellation. 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 guessed that it is far too much to |ask to a $2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just |there to push us to the competing products ? | |We hesitated to buy another Digium card after the problems |with TE410P, but I told myself it was nice to support Asterisk |by buying some Digium cards. Now Digium make us regret our |buys and a disappointed customer is a lost customer forever... |Too sad... ___ --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] 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 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 box with both a TDM04b and A200D installed indicates and average of 99.96% for both. Not sure how accurate that might be as the A200D card appears as a 24 channel interface in terms of /dev/zap even though only four ports are equipped. The TDM04b won't support faxes on this box under any circumstances and I've played around with about every possible pci latency, etc, change that folks have suggested in the last two years. Based on my heavily invested testing to date (which includes about two years of doing this), the only usable fax support thus far comes from using the A200D card with the fax machine directly connected to a fxs port on that card, and an fxo (pstn) port on the exact same card. Those fax tests have been 100% solid using a cheap/older Brother fax machine. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 implemented, that card should work. The TDM400 card will not work in 99% of the deployments. I apologize if I'm being dense, but I don't understand why the fact that a call traverses the PCI bus would kill a fax transmission. I made the following setup, and it consistently gets 31200 and 33600 connects, no disconnects, good throughput: Modem --- SIP ATA(G.711u) --- (LAN) --- Asterisk --- (TDM400FXS) --- Modem I get the same thing (although alwyas 31200 connects, never 33600) with: Modem --- (TDM400FXS) --- Asterisk --- (TDM400FXS_same_card) --- Modem 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? I realize that clearing up my confusion about this isn't probably going to result in the problem being fixed, but I sure would like to know... -Rusty ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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' frequencies and signaling rate shifts, and these are done with very critical timing requirements. Yes, error correction is available, but it just means that sending FAXes over a lousy connection will take a very long time, instead of failing completely. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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. When it is implemented, that card should work. The TDM400 card will not work in 99% of the deployments. I apologize if I'm being dense, but I don't understand why the fact that a call traverses the PCI bus would kill a fax transmission. I made the following setup, and it consistently gets 31200 and 33600 connects, no disconnects, good throughput: Modem --- SIP ATA(G.711u) --- (LAN) --- Asterisk --- (TDM400FXS) --- Modem I get the same thing (although alwyas 31200 connects, never 33600) with: Modem --- (TDM400FXS) --- Asterisk --- (TDM400FXS_same_card) --- Modem 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? I realize that clearing up my confusion about this isn't probably going to result in the problem being fixed, but I sure would like to know... The fax issue revolves around the fact that fax signals are analog audio (eg, modem) that have to be accurately reproduced end-to-end (whatever that happens to mean in your environment). If a fax machine is attached to a sip ata device, the network infrastructure has to be 100% rock solid (no dropped packets, no congestion, relatively low utilization, no contention for resources anywhere between asterisk and the adapter). If those items are unknown or poor, the analog fax signal will not be accurately reproduced at any sip ata device. Likewise, the transfer of data across the pci bus has to be 100% accurate with no dropped/slipped packets, no jitter, etc. That has been an issue with an estimated 95% of the TDM implementations to date. If you go visit some of the sites where developers work with real time audio, you'll find lots of comments relative to the inadequacies of the pci bus as implemented on many many mobo's. Most of what I've read relates to the North/South pci bridge chipsets, and design errors in those chipsets including some of the Intel products. Those same issues seem to be impacting the TDM card in one form or another, and no one has openly put a finger on exactly why. The majority of implementations that need fax capability is related to an internal fax machine (however its connected) to an fxo (pstn) port. If you have that working via a TDM400 card, everyone on this list would love to know exactly which mobo you are using. A modem's error detection / error correction capability (which does not exist in a lot of fax machines and point of sale devices) can handle small amounts of those issues noted above. However, it cannot handle anything more then a glitch here and there without significantly impacting data throughput. ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
I am using a digium TE110P and a TDM04b (or whatever the one with 4 FXS ports is called) on a Dell PowerEdge 2850. No problems at all with faxing with a cheap fax machine, though the asterisk box almost never goes above 5% CPU usage unless there are some conference calls going on. I can run modems/faxes just fine (though the modem connections seem to have a bit more latency than through a POTS line, it is acceptable for our use.) Just be sure to set echocancelwhenbridged=no and tweak your txgain and rxgain on the line (this is not a do it once and you're done thing, I had to go back probably 5 times over the course of 2 weeks to get the right numbers.) I am even doing a redirect to eFax (I'd do with asterisk but we already had an efax account and it works well enough) on one of my DIDs and it works great. Quite honestly I found a lot of documentation on how faxing in Asterisk is hard, and I just never saw that. Maybe I got lucky with a magic combination of hardware and forgiving fax machine, but it kind of just worked the first time I tried it. Now, if only setting up a 'page all' function on Cisco 79XX SIP phones without using a line appearance was so easy... -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 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 box with both a TDM04b and A200D installed indicates and average of 99.96% for both. Not sure how accurate that might be as the A200D card appears as a 24 channel interface in terms of /dev/zap even though only four ports are equipped. The TDM04b won't support faxes on this box under any circumstances and I've played around with about every possible pci latency, etc, change that folks have suggested in the last two years. Based on my heavily invested testing to date (which includes about two years of doing this), the only usable fax support thus far comes from using the A200D card with the fax machine directly connected to a fxs port on that card, and an fxo (pstn) port on the exact same card. Those fax tests have been 100% solid using a cheap/older Brother fax machine. ___ --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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
Ryan Amos wrote: I am using a digium TE110P and a TDM04b (or whatever the one with 4 FXS ports is called) on a Dell PowerEdge 2850. No problems at all with faxing with a cheap fax machine, though the asterisk box almost never goes above 5% CPU usage unless there are some conference calls going on. I can run modems/faxes just fine (though the modem connections seem to have a bit more latency than through a POTS line, it is acceptable for our use.) Just be sure to set echocancelwhenbridged=no and tweak your txgain and rxgain on the line (this is not a do it once and you're done thing, I had to go back probably 5 times over the course of 2 weeks to get the right numbers.) I am even doing a redirect to eFax (I'd do with asterisk but we already had an efax account and it works well enough) on one of my DIDs and it works great. Quite honestly I found a lot of documentation on how faxing in Asterisk is hard, and I just never saw that. Maybe I got lucky with a magic combination of hardware and forgiving fax machine, but it kind of just worked the first time I tried it. Now, if only setting up a 'page all' function on Cisco 79XX SIP phones without using a line appearance was so easy... -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 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 box with both a TDM04b and A200D installed indicates and average of 99.96% for both. Not sure how accurate that might be as the A200D card appears as a 24 channel interface in terms of /dev/zap even though only four ports are equipped. The TDM04b won't support faxes on this box under any circumstances and I've played around with about every possible pci latency, etc, change that folks have suggested in the last two years. Based on my heavily invested testing to date (which includes about two years of doing this), the only usable fax support thus far comes from using the A200D card with the fax machine directly connected to a fxs port on that card, and an fxo (pstn) port on the exact same card. Those fax tests have been 100% solid using a cheap/older Brother fax machine. ___ --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 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. -- Joshua Colp Software Developer Digium P - 256-428-6066 C - 506-878-0147 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 08:19 -0500, Rich Adamson 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 implemented, that card should work. The TDM400 card will not work in 99% of the deployments. Faxing via T1 cards is known to work in a fairly large number of deployments, but its likely to be highly dependent on exactly where the fax machine is located relative to *. Eg, incoming pstn fax via a T1 that is expected to be switched to a sip ata adapter has lots of technical and specific infrastructure dependencies that have to be addressed by the implementor / engineer. The plug-n-play approach will have a very high failure rate. What about: T1 card - * - different T1 card - channel bank - fax or T1 card - * - FXS card - fax Is the rule as long as the fax doesn't go over an IP network, then faxing should work? ...Jeff 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 day service on their PBX's. Sad to see that faxing is nearly impossible on digium cards. To me is like saying here you 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 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 to a TE411P for |the hardware echo cancellation. 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 guessed that it is far too much to |ask to a $2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just |there to push us to the competing products ? | |We hesitated to buy another Digium card after the problems |with TE410P, but I told myself it was nice to support Asterisk |by buying some Digium cards. Now Digium make us regret our |buys and a disappointed customer is a lost customer forever... |Too sad... ___ --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
Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 PCI-X on a lot of their new systems. Does this newer bus standard help the situation with faxing? Will Digium offer cards that support the new bus? 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 that other companies can adopt the standard. For example an ISDN card could bridge to a Digium T1 card. Or a card that supported legacy digital phones could bridge to other cards. ...Jeff ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 bus. Will Digium offer cards that support the new bus? All of our cards work in PCI-X slots, but none of them take advantage of 64-bit slots or speeds higher than 33MHz. 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 that other companies can adopt the standard. For example an ISDN card could bridge to a Digium T1 card. Or a card that supported legacy digital phones could bridge to other cards. That is called H.100, and it has existed for many years. It's also ludicrously expensive to implement, so you won't see it on Digium cards any time soon :-) ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 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 PCI-X on a lot of their new systems. Does this newer bus standard help the situation with faxing? Will Digium offer cards that support the new bus? 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 that other companies can adopt the standard. For example an ISDN card could bridge to a Digium T1 card. Or a card that supported legacy digital phones could bridge to other cards. ...Jeff ___ --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 -- Aaron Daniel Computer Systems Technician Sam Houston State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] (936) 294-4198 ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 their server class machines. ...Jeff 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 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 PCI-X on a lot of their new systems. Does this newer bus standard help the situation with faxing? Will Digium offer cards that support the new bus? 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 that other companies can adopt the standard. For example an ISDN card could bridge to a Digium T1 card. Or a card that supported legacy digital phones could bridge to other cards. ...Jeff ___ --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
Re: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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? No. PCI-X is just a wider/higher-speed version of PCI, not a new bus. Sorry, I meant PCI-e. [...] 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 that other companies can adopt the standard. For example an ISDN card could bridge to a Digium T1 card. Or a card that supported legacy digital phones could bridge to other cards. That is called H.100, and it has existed for many years. It's also ludicrously expensive to implement, so you won't see it on Digium cards any time soon :-) 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 or 256 calls be any cheaper? ...Jeff ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 FAXing issue is really more a problem with specific card designs and other system issues than it is with the bus at all. ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 or 256 calls be any cheaper? It's doubtful. The issues are the cables and connectors are not cheap, and getting the boards to pass EMI and other certifications would be more complex. In addition, it means every board now has to have support for a super-speed TDM bus, even if it's only a 4-port analog interface card, and it also needs onboard logic to be able to map channels around. That would increase the card cost quite a bit, even for people that have no desire to use this method of connection. ___ --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: Faxing and PCI (was Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !)
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 issue, since the issue is _not_ PCI bus bandwidth. In fact, the FAXing issue is really more a problem with specific card designs and other system issues than it is with the bus at all. If it's card design issues, then it is something that could be fixed in the future with newer designs. If it's other system issues, that makes it more difficult to fix. If a fax comes in to a port on a Quad T1 board and goes out of another port on the same card to a channel bank then that should be an optimal setup, correct? 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 - TDM400P-FXS - fax 6. T1 - TE110P - PCI - Ethernet/IP - IAXy - fax 7. FXO-TDM400P - PCI - Ethernet/IP - IAXy - fax Is this a correct? If it's not a PCI problem then there shouldn't be much of a difference between options 3 and 4. If it's a card issue then it would be nice to know which T1 cards handle fax better than others. ...Jeff ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 disappointing ! | |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 day service on their PBX's. | | Sad to see that faxing is nearly impossible on digium cards. |To me is | like saying here you have a great car but.. It cannot handle a car | stereo :( | |Is this not possibly also related to the patenting issues on |the email to fax gateways? | |-- |Cheers, | |Matt Riddell |___ | ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
Im my case, faxes are coming in thru an E1 (using unicall) and into iaxmodem/hylafax.. So it should pretty much work.. Except the te110p is missing frames so faxes are getting desynced. |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of |Rich Adamson |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 not yet been implemented. Its basically |required to support faxes in an analog environment. When it |is implemented, that card should work. The TDM400 card will |not work in 99% of the deployments. | |Faxing via T1 cards is known to work in a fairly large number |of deployments, but its likely to be highly dependent on |exactly where the fax machine is located relative to *. Eg, |incoming pstn fax via a T1 that is expected to be switched to |a sip ata adapter has lots of technical and specific |infrastructure dependencies that have to be addressed by the |implementor / engineer. The plug-n-play approach will have a |very high failure rate. | | |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 day service on their PBX's. | | Sad to see that faxing is nearly impossible on digium cards. |To me is | like saying here you 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 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 to a TE411P for the hardware echo | |cancellation. 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 guessed that it is far too much to |ask to a | |$2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just there |to push us | |to the competing products ? | | | |We hesitated to buy another Digium card after the problems with | |TE410P, but I told myself it was nice to support Asterisk by buying | |some Digium cards. Now Digium make us regret our buys and a | |disappointed customer is a lost customer forever... | |Too sad... | |___ |--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
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
My main concern is that many people want to benefit from integrated faxing like voicemail, for example, sending faxes via pdfto their email. That's one of the pluses of having an asterisk/voip system. |-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 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 box with both a TDM04b and A200D |installed indicates and average of 99.96% for both. Not sure |how accurate that might be as the A200D card appears as a 24 |channel interface in terms of /dev/zap even though only four |ports are equipped. | |The TDM04b won't support faxes on this box under any |circumstances and I've played around with about every possible |pci latency, etc, change that folks have suggested in the last |two years. | |Based on my heavily invested testing to date (which includes |about two years of doing this), the only usable fax support |thus far comes from using the A200D card with the fax machine |directly connected to a fxs port on that card, and an fxo |(pstn) port on the exact same card. Those fax tests have been |100% solid using a cheap/older Brother fax machine. | | | |___ |--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
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 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 speeds, fax modems use a half-duplex standard that is less complex than that used by full duplex modems running at the same speed. If there is a problem with Digium hardware handling fax signals it cannot be laid at the purported massively more complex signalling of fax transmissions. -- George Pajari, netVOICE communications604 484 VOIP (484 8647 x102) Open Source VoIP/Telephony Specialists 1 877 NET VOIP (638 8647 x102) www.netvoice.ca www.ip-centrex.ca www.digium.ca www.grandstream.ca www.sipura.ca www.snom.ca ___ --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] 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 to a TE411P for the hardware echo cancellation. 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 guessed that it is far too much to ask to a $2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just there to push us to the competing products ? We hesitated to buy another Digium card after the problems with TE410P, but I told myself it was nice to support Asterisk by buying some Digium cards. Now Digium make us regret our buys and a disappointed customer is a lost customer forever... Too sad... ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 switched to a TE411P for the hardware echo cancellation. 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 guessed that it is far too much to ask to a $2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just there to push us to the competing products ? We hesitated to buy another Digium card after the problems with TE410P, but I told myself it was nice to support Asterisk by buying some Digium cards. Now Digium make us regret our buys and a disappointed customer is a lost customer forever... Too sad... ___ --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
Re: [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 more documentation on the different configuration options you can pass on load... I think the only problems we've really had are configuration related, or bad hardware on our part, oh, and a server room fry that took out more than just the Asterisk servers :-P Aaron 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 switched to a TE411P for the hardware echo cancellation. 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 guessed that it is far too much to ask to a $2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just there to push us to the competing products ? We hesitated to buy another Digium card after the problems with TE410P, but I told myself it was nice to support Asterisk by buying some Digium cards. Now Digium make us regret our buys and a disappointed customer is a lost customer forever... Too sad... ___ --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 -- Aaron Daniel Computer Systems Technician Sam Houston State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] (936) 294-4198 ___ --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] Digium cards, so disappointing !
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 guessed that it is far too much to ask to a $2495 card ! Is the fax extension in Asterisk just there to push us to the competing products ? If your zttest has good results (mostly 100%, nothing less than 99.98%) then you should be able to receive faxes (I'd suggest iaxmodem+HylaFAX) despite Digium's disclaimer. I do not excuse Digium, however, from sidelining fax the way that they have. Lee. ___ --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
