Re: [Asterisk-Users] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 04:42:57PM -0600, Colin Anderson wrote: CA> I looked long and hard at the LAN and it was basically narrowed down to the CA> switches. In this smaller install, several cheapo Dlink ($30) switches What switches you mean? How they named? -- JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 58417635 (please, use jabber, if you can) http://freesource.info/ ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Guido Hecken wrote: I looked long and hard at the LAN and it was basically narrowed down to the switches. In this smaller install, several cheapo Dlink ($30) switches de-aggregate a Cisco Catalyst switch. What I noticed was that any phone plugged direcly into the Catalyst did *not* lock up or reboot. Any phone plugged into the crap switches experienced the lockup. So now we are down to the cheap switches themselves. We are nuking the Dlink switches and replacing them with 3com workgroup switches, same as what we use in the large install to good effect, and I fully expect the problem to dissapear. We had the same problems with some cheap LevelOne Switches. The Snoms rebooted during a call, calls dropped etc. Replacing the switches was the solution. Guido ___ --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 I have moved to 3com switches,but the Snom 320 still locks up, and also I don't think it's reasonable to force customers to buy 3com just because Snom firmware sucks. ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
> On Fri, 26 May 2006, Guido Hecken wrote: > > We had the same problems with some cheap LevelOne Switches. > > The Snoms rebooted during a call, calls dropped etc. > > Replacing the switches was the solution. > > A switch should NEVER cause ANY device to lockup, ever. Period. > If a phone locks up / reboots due to something a switch sends, then the > phone is faulty. > Okay, it shouldn't reboot if not told to do so but a switch with e.g. corrupt mac tables can bring your whole network down and the phone has no chance too. However, if the SNOMS still reboot with the follwing settings attached, I would also think of a possible bug in the firmware. Setup/Advanced Detect Ethernet Cable Unplug: off Action on Ethernet cable replug: ignore Guido ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
On Fri, 26 May 2006, Remco Barende wrote: There is just no valid reason why the phone would need to lockup or reboot even if the network connection would be problematic, no matter what. That is just poor design, not a feature. I agree 100%. No device should ever lockup or reboot due to a marginal connection. -Dan ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
On Fri, 26 May 2006, Rich Adamson wrote: Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak wrote: Blaming the 3com switch is very likely to be the wrong root cause. High probability the 3com was not configured properly for the phone. Just curious - what configuration issues did you have in mind? A partial list of issues that we've seen in the last 12 years include: - auto negotiation of duplex settings (mismatch) - spanning tree disabling ports for first 30 seconds after any link state change (some attached devices don't like that) - spanning tree loops that end up isolating devices from the backbone (spanning tree is usually implemented by the manufacture by default) - various switch manufacturers have licensed/implemented cisco's discovery protocol, and the user doesn't realize some equipment attached to such ports actually use the cdp data to change port configuration, while other devices might barf on those packets. - assumptions that all switches operate at wire speeds and "buffer" packets (eg, no such thing as a switch buffer; packets will be dropped under high load conditions) - distributing vlans across multiple switches where assumptions are made relative to what happens when two or more vlans are transporting traffic volumes that when combined exceed a trunk's port speed (eg, don't forget about broadcast storms). - switch forwarding tables that are too small (eg, workgroup switches) and the table fills, essentially turning the switch into a hub - bad assumptions relative to rate limiting broadcast and multicast packets, and how that impacts normal traffic. - etc, etc. If any of these issues makes a _phone reboot or lockup_ then that is a serious flaw with the phone. I migh expect a cheapy grandstream to have issues but expensive snom should really do better. -Dan ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
On Fri, 26 May 2006, Guido Hecken wrote: We had the same problems with some cheap LevelOne Switches. The Snoms rebooted during a call, calls dropped etc. Replacing the switches was the solution. A switch should NEVER cause ANY device to lockup, ever. Period. If a phone locks up / reboots due to something a switch sends, then the phone is faulty. -Dan ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Colin Anderson wrote: More cowbell? Shit, you owe me a new keyboard! Funniest thing I've *ever* read on the list. I've experienced the auto-negotiate issue with Snom's before. I forgot to mention that we make it part of our standard install to force 100baseT-full. I've also noticed the Catalyst does the spanning-tree thing and waits up to 30 seconds before enabling the port - this can cause problems with Snoms because they boot before the Catalyst enables the port, causing registration to fail. Then you warm-boot the Snom and everything's OK. The same spanning tree issue (not forwarding packets for 30 to 60 seconds) is also a problem with most of the newer PC systems (particularly with MS O/S) as the system boots up quicker then when the switch is ready to forward traffic. An MS O/S system begins broadcasting for domain controllers (etc) before the switch is ready to forward traffic resulting in some very strange problems that most Sys Admins diagnose incorrectly. One last interesting tidbit: We have a *lot* of Dell Dimensions with super craptastic embedded Ethernet. They will auto negotiate with a Snom (plugged into the PC port) to 100baseT full, but then you can't ping or TX past the phone itself. Oddly enough, it gets an IP from our DHCP server OK. Forcing the Dell to 100baseT full, half, or even 10 full works 100% of the time. This never happens on any kind of decent Ethernet card like an 82557 chip or 3com. If we have an Optiplex, it *just works* Right on! But, its not just the Dell products. There are a fair number of other products with the same issue, and a few "drivers" that have half/duplex backwards (set it to half and the interface operates in full, or, setting to either half or full fails but "auto" works in full duplex just fine). ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Remco Barende wrote: On Fri, 26 May 2006, Rich Adamson wrote: You mean that 3Com switches are not to be regarded as decent switches? At least Snom could have put some remark then that you need a certain brand of switches. If 3Com is not good enough for the phones I would have bought different phones. Blaming the 3com switch is very likely to be the wrong root cause. High probability the 3com was not configured properly for the phone. The 3C16479 is a non-configurable, non-managed 3Com workgroup gbit switch. It is directly connected to the asterisk server with one cable, the phones are connected to the other ports. There is nothing to configure on the switch. The switch is doing auto negotiation, whether you can see it or not. That's exactly why I'd never use an unmanaged switch for anything that is critical. Gig in this case has no value whatsoever. Maybe I need to change my opinion, it's not only the firmware that sucks, if the ethernet chip on the phone is this oversensitive I guess the same would apply for the hardware. Part of the problem with this half vs full duplex is there are no commonly implemented industry standards for negotiating a correct setting. Essentially, the switch port "and" the attached device auto negotiates at the same time, and one device "sees" what it thinks is half duplex when the other device is in the middle of its negotiation process. In most cases, statically defining "one" of the two is sufficient, but to be 100% accurate from a performance perspective, both should be statically defined. Gig ports that truly operate at gig speeds is not an issue as there is no such thing as half duplex gig. But, if the attached devices only operate at 10/100 speeds, the switch still has to negotiate the half vs full duplex. There is just no valid reason why the phone would need to lockup or reboot even if the network connection would be problematic, no matter what. That is just poor design, not a feature. I'd agree with that 1000%. I stopped using snom products with the 200 for that very reason (eg, lack of testing and quality control). ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
>From my point of view, using cheap or expensive switch is not the point.The point is "what kind of switch implementation Snom phones require ?".Up to now, it seems that problems relate to auto-negociation. Would it be possible for anyone to check that, comparing fixed and auto-negociated behaviours on the same "cheap" or "descent" switch ?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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
On Fri, 26 May 2006, Rich Adamson wrote: You mean that 3Com switches are not to be regarded as decent switches? At least Snom could have put some remark then that you need a certain brand of switches. If 3Com is not good enough for the phones I would have bought different phones. Blaming the 3com switch is very likely to be the wrong root cause. High probability the 3com was not configured properly for the phone. The 3C16479 is a non-configurable, non-managed 3Com workgroup gbit switch. It is directly connected to the asterisk server with one cable, the phones are connected to the other ports. There is nothing to configure on the switch. Maybe I need to change my opinion, it's not only the firmware that sucks, if the ethernet chip on the phone is this oversensitive I guess the same would apply for the hardware. There is just no valid reason why the phone would need to lockup or reboot even if the network connection would be problematic, no matter what. That is just poor design, not a feature. ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
>More cowbell? Shit, you owe me a new keyboard! Funniest thing I've *ever* read on the list. I've experienced the auto-negotiate issue with Snom's before. I forgot to mention that we make it part of our standard install to force 100baseT-full. I've also noticed the Catalyst does the spanning-tree thing and waits up to 30 seconds before enabling the port - this can cause problems with Snoms because they boot before the Catalyst enables the port, causing registration to fail. Then you warm-boot the Snom and everything's OK. One last interesting tidbit: We have a *lot* of Dell Dimensions with super craptastic embedded Ethernet. They will auto negotiate with a Snom (plugged into the PC port) to 100baseT full, but then you can't ping or TX past the phone itself. Oddly enough, it gets an IP from our DHCP server OK. Forcing the Dell to 100baseT full, half, or even 10 full works 100% of the time. This never happens on any kind of decent Ethernet card like an 82557 chip or 3com. If we have an Optiplex, it *just works* ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Andrew D Kirch wrote: Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak wrote: Blaming the 3com switch is very likely to be the wrong root cause. High probability the 3com was not configured properly for the phone. Just curious - what configuration issues did you have in mind? - Mike Replacing it with a Catalyst? Most of the catalyst switches are pretty good. Some of the older ones have had problems with truly supporting traffic volumes that approach 100% of a port's speed. Some catalyst switches do have queue/prioritization. The less expensive ones only support three queues while more expensive ones support greater numbers of queues. Some support the bits in the IP packet header that were intended to influence priority, while other models ignore those bits but implement prioritization on a per-port basis (which basically assumes one "device" per port). ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak wrote: Blaming the 3com switch is very likely to be the wrong root cause. High probability the 3com was not configured properly for the phone. Just curious - what configuration issues did you have in mind? A partial list of issues that we've seen in the last 12 years include: - auto negotiation of duplex settings (mismatch) - spanning tree disabling ports for first 30 seconds after any link state change (some attached devices don't like that) - spanning tree loops that end up isolating devices from the backbone (spanning tree is usually implemented by the manufacture by default) - various switch manufacturers have licensed/implemented cisco's discovery protocol, and the user doesn't realize some equipment attached to such ports actually use the cdp data to change port configuration, while other devices might barf on those packets. - assumptions that all switches operate at wire speeds and "buffer" packets (eg, no such thing as a switch buffer; packets will be dropped under high load conditions) - distributing vlans across multiple switches where assumptions are made relative to what happens when two or more vlans are transporting traffic volumes that when combined exceed a trunk's port speed (eg, don't forget about broadcast storms). - switch forwarding tables that are too small (eg, workgroup switches) and the table fills, essentially turning the switch into a hub - bad assumptions relative to rate limiting broadcast and multicast packets, and how that impacts normal traffic. - etc, etc. In the case of switch forwarding tables, its very common to see experienced engineers (and others) "assume" a workgroup switch can be used in a large network environment where 23 ports are used for devices within a small workgroup. However, all switches on the market listen for traffic from "any" source (including upstream link), and populates the switch forwarding table with the mac addresses observed. Most "workgroup" switches are limited to 1,024 table entries (sometimes less), and when that table is full, does "something" that is vendor dependent. Some vendors actually clear the table (resulting in the switch operating as a hub until the table is rebuilt again), while other vendors replace the oldest entries with the newest mac address observed. Some vendors will timeout table entries in very short periods of time. The end result from those actions is packets appearing on switch ports for which the attached device has no need to hear (eg, increases the packet traffic on a per port basis). There are lots of other cases where a switch will forward multicast packets to all ports (eg, poor/incorrect multicast support), and the device attached to the port isn't designed to handle such packets. For example, MS systems (and others) spew UPNP multicast packets looking for or advertising gateways and other network resources. If a Snom device hasn't been programmed correctly to ignore such packets, it might roll over (I don't have a clue if that example is reasonable or even accurate; its just an example only). Changing from one vendor's switch to another might lead one to believe the switch was at fault, when in fact the problem is more related to the switch implementor not properly configuring the first switch. (And, in most cases, the implementor doesn't have a clue what type of packets are flowing across the network, let along which ones result in problems for attached devices.) 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: [Asterisk-Users] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak wrote: Blaming the 3com switch is very likely to be the wrong root cause. High probability the 3com was not configured properly for the phone. Just curious - what configuration issues did you have in mind? - Mike Replacing it with a Catalyst? Andrew ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak wrote: I looked long and hard at the LAN and it was basically narrowed down to the switches. In this smaller install, several cheapo Dlink ($30) switches de-aggregate a Cisco Catalyst switch. What I noticed was that any phone plugged direcly into the Catalyst did *not* lock up or reboot. Any phone plugged into the crap switches experienced the lockup. So now we are down to the cheap switches themselves. We are nuking the Dlink switches and replacing them with 3com workgroup switches, same as what we use in the large install to good effect, and I fully expect the problem to dissapear. So does anyone have any theories as to what the technical difference between a "good" switch and a "bad" or "cheapo" switch actually is? Lower latency? Better grounding? More cowbell? By far, the majority of switches on the market today will work just fine for VoIP. Past professional experience dictates (in my mind) that a "managed" switch is the only reasonable approach for any network larger then a home office. There are some inexpensive switches being sold that are less then adequate for business use. For example, Dell rebranded and sold some switches about two years ago that would reboot if an html packet hit the manager IP address; didn't even have to be a crafted packet. Cabletron sold a number of models that would auto reboot at random intervals. HP had some issues with early firmware that essentially resulted in reboots (it was fixed in later firmware versions). Our company conducts professional network performance, security, and voip readniness assessments, and have worked with corporations and institutions in over 40 US states in the last 12 years. We constantly see folks making assumptions about how switches function that are far less then accurate. One example is leaving switch ports to auto negotiate duplex settings. Roughly 50% of the time the switch (and/or device attached to the switch) will get it wrong; one will be full duplex while the other ends up half duplex. "That" one item will have a serious impact on voip quality. The only way to ensure a solid network infrastructure is to use switches that are "manageable", and there are now lots of inexpensive switches on the market that are manageable. In "very" general terms, the higher the cost of the switch, the more functionality one receives. Also in very general terms, the larger the network, the more functionality one needs within the switches. In other words, a network with several hundred switch ports likely requires switches with the capability of supporting vlans, packet queuing/prioritization, etc. Small networks (eg, low traffic volumes) in most cases do not need those same functions. So, your choice of switches is highly dependent on the size of network that your working with. ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Blaming the 3com switch is very likely to be the wrong root cause. High probability the 3com was not configured properly for the phone. Just curious - what configuration issues did you have in mind? - Mike ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
I would like to suggest using any managed switch and hard setting the ports to 100/full I have found that the auto negotiation algorithm is generally to blame on many switches. As an example, connecting a cisco router to a netgear/dlink/3com/etc will geneerate errors on the cisco interface. connecting cisco to cisco does not. connectig netgear/dlink etc does not. But disabling auto makes all play nice together. On May 26, 2006, at 7:38 AM, Rich Adamson wrote: Remco Barende wrote: On Fri, 26 May 2006, Dave Cotton wrote: On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 10:11 +0200, Remco Barende wrote: Thanks for your input! Previously I was using Nortel 10/100 switches, I replaced them some weeks ago with 3C16479 gbit switches. The phones are connected directly to the gbit switches. By coincidence I dit notice on one phone that in a split second a message appeared 'Ethernet cable disconnected'. Because I have cable unplug set to ignore the conversation was not interrupted and the conversation could continue. But that still doesn't solve the occasional lockup. Looks like you're getting somewhere now. That was my real complaint "xyz sucks" helps no one. As I said in my reply I've never had such problems with SNOM, perhaps it's because I've always used decent switches. You mean that 3Com switches are not to be regarded as decent switches? At least Snom could have put some remark then that you need a certain brand of switches. If 3Com is not good enough for the phones I would have bought different phones. Blaming the 3com switch is very likely to be the wrong root cause. High probability the 3com was not configured properly for the phone. ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Remco Barende wrote: On Fri, 26 May 2006, Dave Cotton wrote: On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 10:11 +0200, Remco Barende wrote: Thanks for your input! Previously I was using Nortel 10/100 switches, I replaced them some weeks ago with 3C16479 gbit switches. The phones are connected directly to the gbit switches. By coincidence I dit notice on one phone that in a split second a message appeared 'Ethernet cable disconnected'. Because I have cable unplug set to ignore the conversation was not interrupted and the conversation could continue. But that still doesn't solve the occasional lockup. Looks like you're getting somewhere now. That was my real complaint "xyz sucks" helps no one. As I said in my reply I've never had such problems with SNOM, perhaps it's because I've always used decent switches. You mean that 3Com switches are not to be regarded as decent switches? At least Snom could have put some remark then that you need a certain brand of switches. If 3Com is not good enough for the phones I would have bought different phones. Blaming the 3com switch is very likely to be the wrong root cause. High probability the 3com was not configured properly for the phone. ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
I looked long and hard at the LAN and it was basically narrowed down to the switches. In this smaller install, several cheapo Dlink ($30) switches de-aggregate a Cisco Catalyst switch. What I noticed was that any phone plugged direcly into the Catalyst did *not* lock up or reboot. Any phone plugged into the crap switches experienced the lockup. So now we are down to the cheap switches themselves. We are nuking the Dlink switches and replacing them with 3com workgroup switches, same as what we use in the large install to good effect, and I fully expect the problem to dissapear. So does anyone have any theories as to what the technical difference between a "good" switch and a "bad" or "cheapo" switch actually is? Lower latency? Better grounding? More cowbell? - Mike ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
On Fri, 26 May 2006, Dave Cotton wrote: On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 10:11 +0200, Remco Barende wrote: Thanks for your input! Previously I was using Nortel 10/100 switches, I replaced them some weeks ago with 3C16479 gbit switches. The phones are connected directly to the gbit switches. By coincidence I dit notice on one phone that in a split second a message appeared 'Ethernet cable disconnected'. Because I have cable unplug set to ignore the conversation was not interrupted and the conversation could continue. But that still doesn't solve the occasional lockup. Looks like you're getting somewhere now. That was my real complaint "xyz sucks" helps no one. As I said in my reply I've never had such problems with SNOM, perhaps it's because I've always used decent switches. You mean that 3Com switches are not to be regarded as decent switches? At least Snom could have put some remark then that you need a certain brand of switches. If 3Com is not good enough for the phones I would have bought different phones. ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 10:11 +0200, Remco Barende wrote: > Thanks for your input! > > Previously I was using Nortel 10/100 switches, I replaced them some > weeks ago with 3C16479 gbit switches. The phones are connected directly to > the gbit switches. By coincidence I dit notice on one phone that in a > split second a message appeared 'Ethernet cable disconnected'. Because I > have cable unplug set to ignore the conversation was not interrupted and > the conversation could continue. > > But that still doesn't solve the occasional lockup. > > One phone was giving me *lots* more reboots than others but that was due > to it running firmware 6.0.4 without having the ramdisk converted to jffs. > Apparently the firmware didn't like that at all or just runs out of > memory and decides to reboot. Looks like you're getting somewhere now. That was my real complaint "xyz sucks" helps no one. As I said in my reply I've never had such problems with SNOM, perhaps it's because I've always used decent switches. -- Dave Cotton <[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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
> > I looked long and hard at the LAN and it was basically narrowed down to the > switches. In this smaller install, several cheapo Dlink ($30) switches > de-aggregate a Cisco Catalyst switch. What I noticed was that any phone > plugged direcly into the Catalyst did *not* lock up or reboot. Any phone > plugged into the crap switches experienced the lockup. So now we are down to > the cheap switches themselves. We are nuking the Dlink switches and > replacing them with 3com workgroup switches, same as what we use in the > large install to good effect, and I fully expect the problem to dissapear. We had the same problems with some cheap LevelOne Switches. The Snoms rebooted during a call, calls dropped etc. Replacing the switches was the solution. Guido ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
Changing firmware revs did not help, so that left the LAN. I looked long and hard at the LAN and it was basically narrowed down to the switches. In this smaller install, several cheapo Dlink ($30) switches de-aggregate a Cisco Catalyst switch. What I noticed was that any phone plugged direcly into the Catalyst did *not* lock up or reboot. Any phone plugged into the crap switches experienced the lockup. So now we are down to the cheap switches themselves. We are nuking the Dlink switches and replacing them with 3com workgroup switches, same as what we use in the large install to good effect, and I fully expect the problem to dissapear. It's unfortunate that Snoms have a propensity to freak out in certain environments but I don't think it would preclude me from using Snom in the future. As long as one is aware of this issue, it should be easy enough to work around. Thanks for your input! Previously I was using Nortel 10/100 switches, I replaced them some weeks ago with 3C16479 gbit switches. The phones are connected directly to the gbit switches. By coincidence I dit notice on one phone that in a split second a message appeared 'Ethernet cable disconnected'. Because I have cable unplug set to ignore the conversation was not interrupted and the conversation could continue. But that still doesn't solve the occasional lockup. One phone was giving me *lots* more reboots than others but that was due to it running firmware 6.0.4 without having the ramdisk converted to jffs. Apparently the firmware didn't like that at all or just runs out of memory and decides to reboot. ___ --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] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider
We have a large install of 360's running rev 4.1 with zero problems. I did another, smaller install couple weeks ago with 40 360's running rev 5.3. In both cases, the install was identical, same Asterisk version, same dialplan, everything the same except the differences were: 1. Different firmware rev 2. Different physical LAN Guess what? On the smaller install, lockups and reboots. Emailing Snom, I got this response: "The mentioned behaviour occured under certain network conditions and should have been fixed with V5.5 which is -though its Beta state- the last verified stable and reliable version: snom360: http://fox.snom.com/download/snom360-5.5b-beta-SIP-j.bin I would not recommend to downgrade since you would be loosing some functionality" Changing firmware revs did not help, so that left the LAN. I looked long and hard at the LAN and it was basically narrowed down to the switches. In this smaller install, several cheapo Dlink ($30) switches de-aggregate a Cisco Catalyst switch. What I noticed was that any phone plugged direcly into the Catalyst did *not* lock up or reboot. Any phone plugged into the crap switches experienced the lockup. So now we are down to the cheap switches themselves. We are nuking the Dlink switches and replacing them with 3com workgroup switches, same as what we use in the large install to good effect, and I fully expect the problem to dissapear. It's unfortunate that Snoms have a propensity to freak out in certain environments but I don't think it would preclude me from using Snom in the future. As long as one is aware of this issue, it should be easy enough to work around. ___ --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
