Re: [Asterisk-Users] 1.0_stable is or isn't? (Was: No ringing tone...)
Brian Cuthie wrote: What version of the Asterisk code are you running? 1_0 stable is definitely broken wrt ringback, and the latest stuff seems really broken in all kinds of ways. After seeing that others were having similar problems, and that someone had solved many of them by rolling back to the CVS version from 3/5, I tried the same and things are working marvelously (well, mostly). I've been swamped at work and heven't been able to keep up with the version discussions or monitor asterisk-cvs closely. Could you qualify your statement above about 1-0_stable being broken? I'm running 1.0 stable (CVS-03/20/04-22:33:52) here at work and have noticed faxing over SIP much more stable, but a couple of momentary dropouts on outside calls (GS bt101 - x100p POTS), usually after silence in the conversation. (I *have* noticed RAM almost completely filled, but no swap used...a reboot freed a bunch and I think that fixed some issues. We're a small company and restarting * or rebooting the server isn't that big a deal.) Bob ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] 1.0_stable is or isn't? (Was: No ringing tone...)
When I installed 1_0_STABLE, ringback stopped working completely on all calls through the TDM400P. I can't recall if the SIP phones stopped generating ringback also. Latest builds (as of yesterday) seem to have problems with dropouts, especially with IAX connections. I was seeing dropouts and repeated packets (think Max Headroom) over IAX channels. Checking voicemail from a SIP phone resulted in dropouts pretty consistently when it was playing menus. Now, mind you, I'm not really complaining, since this is not released code. This is from the development CVS tree. But, in my experience it does seem to be broken. However, 3/5 seems to work well for me. Although I am having some trouble with Zapateller. Cheers, brian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Klepfer Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 11:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] 1.0_stable is or isn't? (Was: No ringing tone...) Brian Cuthie wrote: What version of the Asterisk code are you running? 1_0 stable is definitely broken wrt ringback, and the latest stuff seems really broken in all kinds of ways. After seeing that others were having similar problems, and that someone had solved many of them by rolling back to the CVS version from 3/5, I tried the same and things are working marvelously (well, mostly). I've been swamped at work and heven't been able to keep up with the version discussions or monitor asterisk-cvs closely. Could you qualify your statement above about 1-0_stable being broken? I'm running 1.0 stable (CVS-03/20/04-22:33:52) here at work and have noticed faxing over SIP much more stable, but a couple of momentary dropouts on outside calls (GS bt101 - x100p POTS), usually after silence in the conversation. (I *have* noticed RAM almost completely filled, but no swap used...a reboot freed a bunch and I think that fixed some issues. We're a small company and restarting * or rebooting the server isn't that big a deal.) Bob ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] 1.0_stable is or isn't? (Was: No ringing tone...)
Steven Critchfield wrote: On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 11:51, Bob Klepfer wrote: (I *have* noticed RAM almost completely filled, but no swap used...a reboot freed a bunch and I think that fixed some issues. We're a small company and restarting * or rebooting the server isn't that big a deal.) Once again we must teach a newbie about memory usage and the tools they use to check it. If you want to clear up a perceived point of misconception, please do Critch, but will you spare us the sanctimonious bullshit? ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] 1.0_stable is or isn't? (Was: No ringing tone...)
On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 17:51, Bob Klepfer wrote: Steven Critchfield wrote: On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 11:51, Bob Klepfer wrote: (I *have* noticed RAM almost completely filled, but no swap used...a reboot freed a bunch and I think that fixed some issues. We're a small company and restarting * or rebooting the server isn't that big a deal.) Once again we must teach a newbie about memory usage and the tools they use to check it. If you want to clear up a perceived point of misconception, please do Critch, but will you spare us the sanctimonious bullshit? Maybe if this subject hadn't been covered 3 times in less weeks. You seem to first have missed the previous comments on this subject, and second you could have overlooked a one line non personal vent when there was a couple of paragraphs that explained clearly what you needed to know. Now don't bitch about free help. If you wish to have a fully kiss your ass forum, prepare to pay a lot of us then. -- Steven Critchfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
