Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Russell Bryant]

Steve Totaro wrote:
> I have consulted on so many systems with poor audio, the first thing I
> check is IAX or SIP.  If IAX, I move over to SIP and the calls are
> prefect.
> 
> I avoid IAX at all costs, use OpenVPN, open tons of ports on your
> firewall, whatever you can do to use SIP.  The only time I will use
> IAX is if in some remote backwards part of the world, they have
> several NATs so it is impossible to control.
> 
> Even www.iax.cc recommends using SIP.  Overhead is of little concern
> with MPLS and big pipes.

I would be interested to hear if you have had any of these problems with 
the latest 1.4 versions of Asterisk.  A _lot_ of work has gone into IAX2 
support in Asterisk 1.4, and specifically, the most recent 25% of the 
1.4 series or so.

-- 
Russell Bryant
Senior Software Engineer
Open Source Team Lead
Digium, Inc.

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Steve Totaro]

On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Johansson Olle E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 5 jun 2008 kl. 20.45 skrev Michael Graves:
>
>>> I wonder why more vendors haven't adopted IAX yet?
>>
>> I expect that before major players adopt this protocol it'd need to be
>> confirmed as a standard by some form of international body. That was
>> underway, but lacking anyone to push the process along.
>
> Please note that the IAX draft is just an informational RFC, not
> anything that goes any IETF standards track or is endorsed by
> the IETF.
>
> There are many vendor-related protocols documented like that.
>
> (Said from the chan_sip corner).
>
> Cheers,
> /Olle
>

I have consulted on so many systems with poor audio, the first thing I
check is IAX or SIP.  If IAX, I move over to SIP and the calls are
prefect.

I avoid IAX at all costs, use OpenVPN, open tons of ports on your
firewall, whatever you can do to use SIP.  The only time I will use
IAX is if in some remote backwards part of the world, they have
several NATs so it is impossible to control.

Even www.iax.cc recommends using SIP.  Overhead is of little concern
with MPLS and big pipes.

Thanks,
Steve Totaro

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Gavin Henry]

2008/6/7 Gavin Henry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> What model in the Polycom or Aastra range is the 360 level with?

Probably the IP601:

http://www.voipon.co.uk/polycom-soundpoint-ip601-p-121.html

and 57i:

http://www.voipon.co.uk/aastra-57i-ip-phone-p-420.html

Snom 360:

http://www.voipon.co.uk/snom-360-ip-telephone-p-31.html

They all have the 12 keys.

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Gavin Henry]

What model in the Polycom or Aastra range is the 360 level with?

2008/6/6 Chris Bagnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> When I pushed some vendors for prices there was only a tiny gap between
>> the 300 and 360.  Would suggest looking hard at the 360 always...
>
> Interesting... here in the UK the price difference between the 300 and 360 is 
> pretty huge. Either you're getting some stunningly good pricing on 360s or 
> some abysmal pricing on the 300s :-)
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> ___
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>
> asterisk-users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>



-- 
http://www.suretecsystems.com/services/openldap/

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Chris Bagnall]

> When I pushed some vendors for prices there was only a tiny gap between
> the 300 and 360.  Would suggest looking hard at the 360 always...

Interesting... here in the UK the price difference between the 300 and 360 is 
pretty huge. Either you're getting some stunningly good pricing on 360s or some 
abysmal pricing on the 300s :-)

Regards,

Chris



___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Ed W]

Brent Davidson wrote:
> I really like these Snom 300 phones as far as audio quality goes.  I 
> wish they had a few more programmable buttons but that was a 
> purchasing oversight.  We underestimated the number of programmable 
> buttons we would need and opted for the 300 instead of the 360.


When I pushed some vendors for prices there was only a tiny gap between 
the 300 and 360.  Would suggest looking hard at the 360 always...

Ed W

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Benoit Plessis]

Brent Davidson a écrit :

...I wonder why more vendors haven't adopted IAX yet?

Well, even ZoIPer (ex IdeFisk) team, still recommend using SIP over IAX
as "SIP is more mature and reliable in asterisk and zoiper",

--
Benoit

begin:vcard
fn:Benoit Plessis
n:Plessis;Benoit
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel;home:+33 9 52 49 25 06
tel;cell:+33 6 77 42 78 32
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Johansson Olle E]

5 jun 2008 kl. 20.45 skrev Michael Graves:

>> I wonder why more vendors haven't adopted IAX yet?
>
> I expect that before major players adopt this protocol it'd need to be
> confirmed as a standard by some form of international body. That was
> underway, but lacking anyone to push the process along.

Please note that the IAX draft is just an informational RFC, not
anything that goes any IETF standards track or is endorsed by
the IETF.

There are many vendor-related protocols documented like that.

(Said from the chan_sip corner).

Cheers,
/Olle

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Jared Smith]

On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 13:45 -0500, Michael Graves wrote:
> I would've thought that Digium would be the most likely lead proponent,
> but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Actually, Digium has been quite active in helping to try to get the IAX
protocol adopted as a standard.  See
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-guy-iax-04.txt for the latest draft of
the protocol specification as submitted to the IETF.

-- 
Jared Smith
Training Manager
Digium, Inc.


___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Michael Graves]

>I wonder why more vendors haven't adopted IAX yet?

I expect that before major players adopt this protocol it'd need to be
confirmed as a standard by some form of international body. That was
underway, but lacking anyone to push the process along. 

I would've thought that Digium would be the most likely lead proponent,
but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Michael



--
Michael Graves
mgravesmstvp.com
http://blog.mgraves.org
o713-861-4005
c713-201-1262
sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
skype mjgraves
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Brent Davidson]

Philipp von Klitzing wrote:

Hi!

  

I am actually interested in the topic of this post. Ast 1.6 vs 1.4. We
are using asterisk 1.4.2 for a SIP only based configuration. [...] We
are planning to accomodate about 5,000 users on this server. 



Many people on this list will advise you to use a SIP proxy like 
OpenSER in front of Asterisk to take care of SIP registrations - I'll do 
the same. ;->


  


I've seen comments similar to this going around a lot and I've never 
really understood it.  I guess maybe I won't understand it until I am in 
a situation where I need to handle a huge call volume and hundreds or 
thousands of users (I.E. probably never).  In my situation, using 
Asterisk as a distributed PBX with Snom SIP phones I haven't had any 
problems at all with the asterisk end of the system.  All of my 
problems, and I have to stress they are MINOR problems have been related 
to interfacing to the analog PSTN.  I have not not meshed all of the 
branch offices together yet, so I may run into further issues there, but 
all of the inter-office calling will be handled by IAX trunking.  I 
really like these Snom 300 phones as far as audio quality goes.  I wish 
they had a few more programmable buttons but that was a purchasing 
oversight.  We underestimated the number of programmable buttons we 
would need and opted for the 300 instead of the 360.  I also wished they 
used IAX.  It's fairly obvious during the software update process 
thatthey run either a Linux or BSD derivative so it shouldn't be too 
difficult to develop an IAX firmware for them, even if it has to be done 
by a third party.  I wonder why more vendors haven't adopted IAX yet?


-Brent


___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Philipp von Klitzing]

Hi!

> I am actually interested in the topic of this post. Ast 1.6 vs 1.4. We
> are using asterisk 1.4.2 for a SIP only based configuration. [...] We
> are planning to accomodate about 5,000 users on this server. 

Many people on this list will advise you to use a SIP proxy like 
OpenSER in front of Asterisk to take care of SIP registrations - I'll do 
the same. ;->

> Before the release of 1.6 i heard that its architecture is going to be
> different from 1.2 and 1.4. Recently i read an article about
> freeswitch, which explains how its functionality is like asterisk but
> it can perform better than asterisk due to its architectural
> differences. [...] If asterisk architecture is being rewritten in 1.6
> to achive the same goal, then we will be happy to use 1.6 instead of
> shifting the whole system to freeswitch. 

Looks like you've just decided to move to FreeSwitch ;-> While "early 
testing" shows that 1.6 can increase SIP performance compared to 1.4 up 
to factor 3-4, this release is by no means a from-the-ground-up re-write 
like FreeSwitch.

Read more:
http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Asterisk+v1.6
http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Asterisk+dimensioning

Cheers, Philipp


___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Rizwan Hisham]

Brent, hope your problems go away soon.

I am actually interested in the topic of this post. Ast 1.6 vs 1.4. We are
using asterisk 1.4.2 for a SIP only based configuration. Currently we have
about 200 SIP users which can cause approximately upto 3 simultaneous calls.
We are mainly concerned about the performance and stability of asterisk when
the load increases. Our server can handle about 100 simultaneous calls
having 3Ghz Dual Intl-Xeon Processor with 2GB of ram using G711 codec, and
around 30 simultanoeus calls using G729 codec. This we are expecting from
the hardware. We are planning to accomodate  about 5,000 users on this
server.

Before the release of 1.6 i heard that its architecture is going to be
different from 1.2 and 1.4. Recently i read an article about
freeswitch,
which explains how its functionality is like asterisk but it can perform
better than asterisk due to its architectural differences. The main
developer for freeswitch is anthony who also codes for asterisk. He
explaines why the architecture of asterisk needs to be changed which
requires massive recoding, but nobody took the step to do it. Thats why he
started freeswitch on his own to redifine the architecture, so that the
performance and reliability of the switch should be better than asterisk. In
his article he has already said that freeswitch beats asterisk by a factor
of 10.

If asterisk architecture is being rewritten in 1.6 to achive the same goal,
then we will be happy to use 1.6 instead of shifting the whole system to
freeswitch. We dont have any problem or issues with 1.4.2 yet. We are mainly
concerned about the its performance when the load increases. If 1.6 is more
reliable under heavy loads then we would like to use it.

If anyone can put some light on this topic, all i can say is thanx for
sharing your thaughts and experiences.



On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 1:13 AM, Brent Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Just an update.  I tried updating to the newest Rhino Release firmware
> 1.15 and newest stable driver version 2.2.6.  It works OK with
> zaptel-1.4.9.2 and compiles OK with 1.4.10.1 but when compiled against
> zaptel 1.4.10.1 Asterisk does not see any zap channels.  I'm currently
> running one branch office with the upgraded firmware, driver,
> zaptel-1.4.9.2 and Asterisk-1.4.20.1.  I'll see how everything goes
> there and may upgrade the other offices if it works OK.
>
> Thanks,
> Brent
>
> ___
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>
> asterisk-users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>



-- 
Best Regards
Rizwan Hisham
___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 09:28:52PM +1000, Rob Hillis wrote:
> 
> 
> Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:40:14AM +1000, Rob Hillis wrote:
> >   
> >>> If you use a hardware EC (or technically: a span-specific echo
> >>> cancellation method) the generic Zaptel echo canceller (software-based,
> >>> OSLEC in this case) will not be used.
> >>>   
> >> That's not always been my experience with OSLEC.  HPEC and the generic 
> >> Zaptel echo canceller seem to work this way, but as I've said, I've had 
> >> two cases where I've had to remove OSLEC to stop it degrading voice 
> >> quality where there is a hardware echo canceller in play.
> >> 
> > Unless there are some really strange OSLEC patches floating around, of
> > which I'm not aware, this should not be the case.
> >
> > OSLEC uses exactly the same EC interface to Asterisk as the built-in
> > one and HPEC do. Any chance you didn't actually fully unload zaptel?
> >   
> 
> These weren't installs that we'd done - in both instances, they were 
> companies who had bought Trixbox based systems from someone else who had 
> subsequently gone out of business.  Granted, I had /assumed/ that OSLEC 
> was causing problems by not disabling itself properly when hardware echo 
> cancellation was found - and I guess that assumption stuck when the 
> removal of OSLEC resolved the problem.

Trixbox has (had?) an earlier version of OSLEC that failed to properly
handle the echo training function. And it also sets echotraining=800
(which is probably is not such a good idea anyway nowadays).

That combination causes bad audio. Disable echo traning and/or upgrade
OSLEC.

-- 
   Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755  jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+972-50-7952406   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.xorcom.com  iax:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/tzafrir

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Rob Hillis]

Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:40:14AM +1000, Rob Hillis wrote:
>   
>>> If you use a hardware EC (or technically: a span-specific echo
>>> cancellation method) the generic Zaptel echo canceller (software-based,
>>> OSLEC in this case) will not be used.
>>>   
>> That's not always been my experience with OSLEC.  HPEC and the generic 
>> Zaptel echo canceller seem to work this way, but as I've said, I've had 
>> two cases where I've had to remove OSLEC to stop it degrading voice 
>> quality where there is a hardware echo canceller in play.
>> 
> Unless there are some really strange OSLEC patches floating around, of
> which I'm not aware, this should not be the case.
>
> OSLEC uses exactly the same EC interface to Asterisk as the built-in
> one and HPEC do. Any chance you didn't actually fully unload zaptel?
>   

These weren't installs that we'd done - in both instances, they were 
companies who had bought Trixbox based systems from someone else who had 
subsequently gone out of business.  Granted, I had /assumed/ that OSLEC 
was causing problems by not disabling itself properly when hardware echo 
cancellation was found - and I guess that assumption stuck when the 
removal of OSLEC resolved the problem.


___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:40:14AM +1000, Rob Hillis wrote:
> Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:00:01AM +1000, Rob Hillis wrote:
> >   
> >> Why on earth are you running two layers of echo cancellation - hardware 
> >> and software?  To be honest, I think this is asking for trouble - I've 
> >> seen two occasions where having Oslec and hardware echo cancellation has 
> >> caused significant problems with audio quality - the usual symptoms are 
> >> gaps in the conversation as the hardware cancellation eliminates the 
> >> majority of the echo and the software cancellation subsequently 
> >> eliminates parts of the conversation.
> >> 
> > If you use a hardware EC (or technically: a span-specific echo
> > cancellation method) the generic Zaptel echo canceller (software-based,
> > OSLEC in this case) will not be used.
> 
> That's not always been my experience with OSLEC.  HPEC and the generic 
> Zaptel echo canceller seem to work this way, but as I've said, I've had 
> two cases where I've had to remove OSLEC to stop it degrading voice 
> quality where there is a hardware echo canceller in play.

Unless there are some really strange OSLEC patches floating around, of
which I'm not aware, this should not be the case.

OSLEC uses exactly the same EC interface to Asterisk as the built-in
one and HPEC do. Any chance you didn't actually fully unload zaptel?

-- 
   Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755  jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+972-50-7952406   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.xorcom.com  iax:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/tzafrir

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Rob Hillis]

Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:00:01AM +1000, Rob Hillis wrote:
>   
>> Why on earth are you running two layers of echo cancellation - hardware 
>> and software?  To be honest, I think this is asking for trouble - I've 
>> seen two occasions where having Oslec and hardware echo cancellation has 
>> caused significant problems with audio quality - the usual symptoms are 
>> gaps in the conversation as the hardware cancellation eliminates the 
>> majority of the echo and the software cancellation subsequently 
>> eliminates parts of the conversation.
>> 
> If you use a hardware EC (or technically: a span-specific echo
> cancellation method) the generic Zaptel echo canceller (software-based,
> OSLEC in this case) will not be used.

That's not always been my experience with OSLEC.  HPEC and the generic 
Zaptel echo canceller seem to work this way, but as I've said, I've had 
two cases where I've had to remove OSLEC to stop it degrading voice 
quality where there is a hardware echo canceller in play.


___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Brent Davidson]

Just an update.  I tried updating to the newest Rhino Release firmware 
1.15 and newest stable driver version 2.2.6.  It works OK with 
zaptel-1.4.9.2 and compiles OK with 1.4.10.1 but when compiled against 
zaptel 1.4.10.1 Asterisk does not see any zap channels.  I'm currently 
running one branch office with the upgraded firmware, driver, 
zaptel-1.4.9.2 and Asterisk-1.4.20.1.  I'll see how everything goes 
there and may upgrade the other offices if it works OK.

Thanks,
Brent

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Brent Davidson]

Matt Watson wrote:
> Have you tuned rxgain & txgain in Zapata.conf?   
> http://www.mattgwatson.ca/2008/05/howto-tune-zaptel-dahdi-fxo-interfaces-on-asterisk-pbx/
>  
>
> Also, have you used fxotune to tune each FXO interface?
>
> I believe echo cancellation happens at the Zaptel / DAHDI level, so using 
> Asterisk 1.6 probably isn't going to give you any benefit.
>
>
> --
> Matt Watson
> http://www.mattgwatson.ca
>
>   
FXOTune is apparently not compatible with the R4FXO cards.  Here is the 
output:

fxotune -i
Tuning module /dev/zap/1
Unable to set impedance on fd 4
Failure!
Tuning module /dev/zap/2
Unable to set impedance on fd 4
Failure!
/dev/zap/3 absent: No such device or address
/dev/zap/4 absent: No such device or address
/dev/zap/5 absent: No such file or directory
/dev/zap/6 absent: No such file or directory
/dev/zap/7 absent: No such file or directory
.
. {multiple lines of same basic message edited out}
.
/dev/zap/246 absent: No such file or directory
/dev/zap/247 absent: No such file or directory
/dev/zap/248 absent: No such file or directory
/dev/zap/249 absent: No such file or directory
/dev/zap/250 absent: No such file or directory
/dev/zap/251 absent: No such file or directory
/dev/zap/252 absent: No such file or directory
Unable to tune 2 devices, even though those devices are present


Thanks,
Brent

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Brent Davidson]

Tzafrir Cohen wrote:

On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:00:01AM +1000, Rob Hillis wrote:
  

Brent Davidson wrote:

We're currently using Asterisk 1.4.19, Zaptel 1.4.10, 
Oslec SVN,  Rhino R4FXO-EC cards, and Snom 300 Phones.
  
Why on earth are you running two layers of echo cancellation - hardware 
and software?  To be honest, I think this is asking for trouble - I've 
seen two occasions where having Oslec and hardware echo cancellation has 
caused significant problems with audio quality - the usual symptoms are 
gaps in the conversation as the hardware cancellation eliminates the 
majority of the echo and the software cancellation subsequently 
eliminates parts of the conversation.



If you use a hardware EC (or technically: a span-specific echo
cancellation method) the generic Zaptel echo canceller (software-based,
OSLEC in this case) will not be used.

  



Is there any indication of this in Zaptel?This is the output of my 
ztcfg -vv:


Zaptel Version: 1.4.10
Echo Canceller: Oslec
Configuration
==


Channel map:

Channel 01: FXS Kewlstart (Default) (Slaves: 01)
Channel 02: FXS Kewlstart (Default) (Slaves: 02)

2 channels to configure.

I removed Oslec when I first installed the R4FXO-EC cards, but echo was 
terrible and made the calls unusable.  My gut instinct is telling me 
that my hardware echo cancellation is not working.


Thanks,
Brent
___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:00:01AM +1000, Rob Hillis wrote:
> Brent Davidson wrote:
> > We're currently using Asterisk 1.4.19, Zaptel 1.4.10, 
> > Oslec SVN,  Rhino R4FXO-EC cards, and Snom 300 Phones.
> 
> Why on earth are you running two layers of echo cancellation - hardware 
> and software?  To be honest, I think this is asking for trouble - I've 
> seen two occasions where having Oslec and hardware echo cancellation has 
> caused significant problems with audio quality - the usual symptoms are 
> gaps in the conversation as the hardware cancellation eliminates the 
> majority of the echo and the software cancellation subsequently 
> eliminates parts of the conversation.

If you use a hardware EC (or technically: a span-specific echo
cancellation method) the generic Zaptel echo canceller (software-based,
OSLEC in this case) will not be used.

-- 
   Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755  jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+972-50-7952406   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.xorcom.com  iax:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/tzafrir

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Rob Hillis]

Brent Davidson wrote:
> We're currently using Asterisk 1.4.19, Zaptel 1.4.10, 
> Oslec SVN,  Rhino R4FXO-EC cards, and Snom 300 Phones.

Why on earth are you running two layers of echo cancellation - hardware 
and software?  To be honest, I think this is asking for trouble - I've 
seen two occasions where having Oslec and hardware echo cancellation has 
caused significant problems with audio quality - the usual symptoms are 
gaps in the conversation as the hardware cancellation eliminates the 
majority of the echo and the software cancellation subsequently 
eliminates parts of the conversation.

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Matt Watson]

Have you tuned rxgain & txgain in Zapata.conf?   
http://www.mattgwatson.ca/2008/05/howto-tune-zaptel-dahdi-fxo-interfaces-on-asterisk-pbx/
 

Also, have you used fxotune to tune each FXO interface?

I believe echo cancellation happens at the Zaptel / DAHDI level, so using 
Asterisk 1.6 probably isn't going to give you any benefit.


--
Matt Watson
http://www.mattgwatson.ca


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brent Davidson
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:52 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

Is there some location that outlines the major differences between
Asterisk version 1.4 and version 1.6?  I've read through change logs and
several technical discussions, but technical details don't really give
me the big picture.  Basically, is 1.6 more stable than 1.4?  Is it more
efficient?  Does it work better with echo cancelers like Oslec?  I'm
currently using Asterisk as a PBX for our branch offices and will soon
be converting our main office.  Our goal is to be able to have 2 analog
lines at each office, calls come in to each PBX and are routed by VOIP
to a receptionist at one of the offices who then routes calls
appropriately.  We're currently using Asterisk 1.4.19, Zaptel 1.4.10,
Oslec SVN,  Rhino R4FXO-EC cards, and Snom 300 Phones.  All of our
branch offices have 1MBPS DSL connections and are linked to each other
by VPN's running on our Cisco 1720 routers. Our only problem so far is
with intermittent echo on calls.  Most of the calls have a little echo
right at first, but it goes away almost immediately as the echo canceler
trains.  Every now and then, however, we get a call with terrible echo.
I've put in several e-mails to rhino support asking if the hardware echo
canceler needs something I haven't done but didn't get a response.  I
know echo is just something we have deal with when using analog lines,
but I didn't think it would be this big of a problem.  All of our
offices are in rural areas where digital lines are unavailable so that
is not an option.

Given this setup, is there any reason for me to switch to Asterisk 1.6
or should I stick with 1.4?

Thanks,
Brent Davidson

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Steve Davies]

2008/6/4 Brent Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[snip]
>  We're currently using Asterisk 1.4.19, Zaptel 1.4.10,
> Oslec SVN,  Rhino R4FXO-EC cards, and Snom 300 Phones.
[snip]

Just a small aside...

You go to the trouble of building/using Oslec, and then use hardware
EC? Very odd. Does Oslec understand about not doing EC if the hardware
is doing EC? I imagine this is brokered by Zaptel, but am not sure.
Perhaps you are doing double-EC and causing breakage?

Just a random thought.
Steve

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

[asterisk-users] Asterisk 1.6 vs 1.4?

[Brent Davidson]

Is there some location that outlines the major differences between 
Asterisk version 1.4 and version 1.6?  I've read through change logs and 
several technical discussions, but technical details don't really give 
me the big picture.  Basically, is 1.6 more stable than 1.4?  Is it more 
efficient?  Does it work better with echo cancelers like Oslec?  I'm 
currently using Asterisk as a PBX for our branch offices and will soon 
be converting our main office.  Our goal is to be able to have 2 analog 
lines at each office, calls come in to each PBX and are routed by VOIP 
to a receptionist at one of the offices who then routes calls 
appropriately.  We're currently using Asterisk 1.4.19, Zaptel 1.4.10, 
Oslec SVN,  Rhino R4FXO-EC cards, and Snom 300 Phones.  All of our 
branch offices have 1MBPS DSL connections and are linked to each other 
by VPN's running on our Cisco 1720 routers. Our only problem so far is 
with intermittent echo on calls.  Most of the calls have a little echo 
right at first, but it goes away almost immediately as the echo canceler 
trains.  Every now and then, however, we get a call with terrible echo.  
I've put in several e-mails to rhino support asking if the hardware echo 
canceler needs something I haven't done but didn't get a response.  I 
know echo is just something we have deal with when using analog lines, 
but I didn't think it would be this big of a problem.  All of our 
offices are in rural areas where digital lines are unavailable so that 
is not an option.

Given this setup, is there any reason for me to switch to Asterisk 1.6 
or should I stick with 1.4?

Thanks,
Brent Davidson

___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users