Re: [asterisk-users] asterisk-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Matt]

Going on 2 days now, without incident.   1.2.26 is by far the best update
I've done.  Usually I end up rolling back within a few hours because of
show-stopping bugs.

On Jan 21, 2008 3:11 PM, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> We have now been running 1.2.26 for the better part of today, without
> incident.   This makes me very happy.   We will continue to monitor our PBX
> to see how things go over the next few days.
>
> On Jan 18, 2008 9:24 AM, Steve Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 1.2.26 Works a treat here on several 10s of sites - We are just now
> > starting to look at 1.4.x as it seems that is is begining to stabilise.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > On 1/18/08, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > ** Bump **
> > >
> > > On Jan 17, 2008 3:00 PM, Matt < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > What are people's thoughts on asterisk 1.2.26?  Any show stopping
> > > > bugs?
> > > >
> > >
> > >  
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > -- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Matt]

We have now been running 1.2.26 for the better part of today, without
incident.   This makes me very happy.   We will continue to monitor our PBX
to see how things go over the next few days.

On Jan 18, 2008 9:24 AM, Steve Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 1.2.26 Works a treat here on several 10s of sites - We are just now
> starting to look at 1.4.x as it seems that is is begining to stabilise.
>
> Regards,
> Steve
>
>
> On 1/18/08, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > ** Bump **
> >
> > On Jan 17, 2008 3:00 PM, Matt < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > What are people's thoughts on asterisk 1.2.26?  Any show stopping
> > > bugs?
> > >
> >
> >  
>
>
>
> ___
> -- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Matt]

Yes.. thanks.   I don't want to start a flame war on this, but just my 2
cents.. to date, I've had to lag behind the releases in order to get
something stable.

On Jan 18, 2008 2:53 PM, Michiel van Baak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On 15:00, Thu 17 Jan 08, Matt wrote:
> > What are people's thoughts on asterisk 1.2.26?  Any show stopping bugs?
>
> Apart from the fact asterisk 1.2 is in security maintenance
> mode only and wont get any other bugfixes it will be ok.
> Please consider using 1.4 as it's the official latest stable
> version.
>
> --
>
> Michiel van Baak
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://michiel.vanbaak.eu
> GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x71C946BD
>
> "Why is it drug addicts and computer afficionados are both called 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
>
___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 12:23:06AM +0100, Michiel van Baak wrote:
> On 15:10, Sun 20 Jan 08, Ira wrote:
> > At 02:59 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
> > >I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
> > >the i386 binary and not the i686 one.
> > >
> > >I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
> > >fine now.
> > 
> > I wonder if that's my problem?  I have a 1ghz Celeron and I think I'm 
> > using the 686 build. Would that be the correct match?
> > 
> > Ira 
> 
> To make sure what you are running issue an 'uname -a'
> The Celeron is i686.

This tells you about the kernel, not about the CPU.

-- 
   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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ira]

At 03:23 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
>To make sure what you are running issue an 'uname -a'
>The Celeron is i686.

It says some stuff followed by: i686 i686 i386

Ira 


___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Matt Riddell]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Ira wrote:
> At 02:59 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
>> I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
>> the i386 binary and not the i686 one.
>>
>> I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
>> fine now.
> 
> I wonder if that's my problem?  I have a 1ghz Celeron and I think I'm 
> using the 686 build. Would that be the correct match?

Yeah I think so, but give Digium a yell and get them to log in and check
it out.

- --
Kind Regards,

Matt Riddell
Director
___

http://www.venturevoip.com (Great new VoIP end to end solution)
http://www.venturevoip.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html)
http://www.venturevoip.com/newrssfeed.php (Daily Asterisk News - rss)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHk9piDQNt8rg0Kp4RAgrNAKCYo23Cvs8MvW2TxNAegOpFGY1ArACfe/d5
PUU6sPUbwNMpL5FrIgkoHzY=
=Txvo
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Michiel van Baak]

On 15:10, Sun 20 Jan 08, Ira wrote:
> At 02:59 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
> >I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
> >the i386 binary and not the i686 one.
> >
> >I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
> >fine now.
> 
> I wonder if that's my problem?  I have a 1ghz Celeron and I think I'm 
> using the 686 build. Would that be the correct match?
> 
> Ira 

To make sure what you are running issue an 'uname -a'
The Celeron is i686.

-- 

Michiel van Baak
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://michiel.vanbaak.eu
GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x71C946BD

"Why is it drug addicts and computer afficionados are both called 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ira]

At 02:59 PM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
>I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
>the i386 binary and not the i686 one.
>
>I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
>fine now.

I wonder if that's my problem?  I have a 1ghz Celeron and I think I'm 
using the 686 build. Would that be the correct match?

Ira 


___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Matt Riddell]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

William Stillwell (Ki4swy) wrote:
> I have been running 1.4.17 since its release, and no kernal panics. 
> 
> Before that I was running 1.4.13 without any kernal panics. 

I was getting kernel panics from HPEC, but it was because I was using
the i386 binary and not the i686 one.

I called Digium, they logged in, sorted it out, and everything works
fine now.

- --
Kind Regards,

Matt Riddell
Director
___

http://www.venturevoip.com (Great new VoIP end to end solution)
http://www.venturevoip.com/news.php (Daily Asterisk News - html)
http://www.venturevoip.com/newrssfeed.php (Daily Asterisk News - rss)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHk9I5DQNt8rg0Kp4RAr2cAJ90nLPYTF171HAqGS0mkynDnXplbwCffVn9
ml1B2uVBnVmEbsterwsP0y4=
=kuDX
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ira]

At 11:33 PM 1/19/2008, you wrote:
>PC's age and when they age, things tend to go wrong, particularly 
>when you upgrade software.  Unusual crashes are usually the first 
>sign that something is going wrong.

Well, my experience is they work until they die and that's usually 
the PS or HD. In that machine the HD and memory are new and I've 
never seen a PS cause a problem like that. If not for the effort of 
learning all the stuff I've forgotten and getting new licenses 
because the network card is different, I'd just put in a slightly 
newer machine sitting on the other side of the office.

>To me, it sounds like you've put the money into many of the right 
>areas - segregating your voice and data networks, going with decent 
>phones and ensuring your power is reliable so it just seems a little 
>strange to go cheap on the actual server.

It's my house, the machine is only 4 years old or so and it was a 
decent HP desktop at the time. It's so overkill for my needs it's not 
even funny and 4 years is hardly old enough to be worrying about death.


>It sounds like you've been pretty lucky with this machine - not all 
>desktop machines are going to be anywhere near that reliable.

Personally, almost every machine I've discarded for myself and 
clients has been because they just got too slow. Except for one 
client who still runs DOS on Netware 3.12 and his machines usually 
get tossed because we can't get AT power supplies any more.  Yes, 
they die on occasion but this machine gives no indication there is 
any problem with the hardware.

>The big thing that server grade machines give you is better quality 
>of parts that have been extensively tested with a range of operating systems.

I'd buy the tested part, but quality of parts at this point I'd 
probably argue with.

Ira 


___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[William Stillwell (Ki4swy)]

I have been running 1.4.17 since its release, and no kernal panics. 

Before that I was running 1.4.13 without any kernal panics. 

System Specs: 
4 Core Xeon 5110 @ 1.6Ghz (two dual proc chips) 
8 Gb Ram 
400GB Raid 5 SAS Array 

-- Original Message --
From: Ira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial 
Discussion
Date:  Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:20:56 -0800

>At 11:53 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
>
>>Apart from the fact asterisk 1.2 is in security maintenance
>>mode only and wont get any other bugfixes it will be ok.
>>Please consider using 1.4 as it's the official latest stable
>>version.
>
>Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run 
>for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried 
>about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the 
>latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.
>
>Ira 
>
>
>___
>-- 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
>
 





Sent via the WebMail system at kotbh.net


 
   

___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Hans Witvliet]

On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 13:26 +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
> I wasn't intending to blame Ira for his own problems - I was intending
> to point out that running a production system on discarded hardware is
> a really bad idea.
> 

Let me jump in on that.

Some other posters mention (un-)aging of systems.
All part of your system (being cots, commercial or military grade) that
have moving parts, or are heated up, will degrade.
So if you use forced air cooling of cpu / gpu / northbridge /
southbridge / psu / hdd, these have to be replaced after some years. No
matter wether if they are working fine or not. For those parts are MTBF
defined, and you can not win from statistics.
Same is true about the HDD itself (moving parts & heat). Replace them
after their expected lifetime is thrue.

This is true for all manufactured machines, cheap or expensive.

But it gets worse for machines from the around-the-corner shop.

I found out, over and over again sadly enough, that the bulk of them
does have a faintest clue what kind od damage ESD can do to electronic
components. They just grap some parts together, power it on, try to
install some bloatware. And that's it.

Problem with ESD-damage is, that there is a fair chance that you wont
notice the damage for two or three years

I know from Sun and IBM that all of their used parts serialnumbers are
tracked, all parts are tested before they are used or shipped to
customers. All applicable engineers are regulary re-trained considering
ESD and their manufacturing department has to follow ever ESD rule.
(Otherwise governemental departmens won't do business with them)

Even medium-sized companies have people who are completeli ESD-ignorant.

So for serious installations, either commerical-quality, or diy, if you
know what you're doing...

Hans

___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Steve Totaro]

Thomas Kenyon wrote:
> Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>   
>> Well, there is not enough data to suggest that. Before blaming Ira for
>> being such a cheap fellow (after all, he didn't buy one of those IBM big
>> iorns to run Asterisk on) we should also consider that the upgrade to
>> 1.4 probably also involved an upgrade of Zaptel, which *is* kernel
>> space.
>>
>> 
> Does that make someone cheap? My callweaver test system is running on a 
> S/H big heavy IBM server (with redundant PSU, hotswapable, RAID etc.).
>
> Admittedly it was very competatively priced.
>   
Cheap, Frugal, Price Savvy, all may be labels for calling someone 
cheap.  I call it sound fiscal policy providing what you use suits your 
needs and does not cost you more in the long run. 

I have even seen an Emachine running a somewhat busy PBX with over 
year's uptime.  I would call that a gamble but certainly it has paid off 
for them. 

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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Thomas Kenyon]

Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> 
> Well, there is not enough data to suggest that. Before blaming Ira for
> being such a cheap fellow (after all, he didn't buy one of those IBM big
> iorns to run Asterisk on) we should also consider that the upgrade to
> 1.4 probably also involved an upgrade of Zaptel, which *is* kernel
> space.
> 
Does that make someone cheap? My callweaver test system is running on a 
S/H big heavy IBM server (with redundant PSU, hotswapable, RAID etc.).

Admittedly it was very competatively priced.

___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Steve Totaro]

On Jan 19, 2008 9:26 PM, Rob Hillis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  I wasn't intending to blame Ira for his own problems - I was intending to
> point out that running a production system on discarded hardware is a really
> bad idea.
>
> I wasn't even suggesting a mammoth server - as you may or may not have
> seen in my subsequent reply to him, the place I work for sells fairly
> low-end servers as Asterisk boxes which (at least in Australia) are
> comparable to mid to upper-mid range desktops in terms of pricing.  90% of
> the serious reliability problems I've seen are on hardware that people have
> taken the really cheap route on.
>
> Most people seem to think that Asterisk is a really cheap PBX.  While
> Asterisk is certainly *cheaper* than just about all comparable PBXs, if
> it's to be done properly and reliably it's certainly not dirt cheap.
> Evaluating Asterisk certainly can be since if it's only a test system, you
> can scrounge up some older hardware.  The real mistake is in putting the
> older hardware into full production.
>

I have a production box that is a HP 380 with dual Xeon 2.8 procs and two
gigs of RAM and RAID 5 that was discarded by a large company.  Absolutely
nothing wrong with the box, they just went all IBM.  One person's trash is
another person's treasure!

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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Rob Hillis]

Not the first time I've seen something like this happen.  If you read
what I said, I wasn't saying that this /was/ what was happening with his
hardware, merely that it's the first sign.

Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 06:33:31PM +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
>   
>> PC's age and when they age, things tend to go wrong, particularly when
>> you upgrade software.  Unusual crashes are usually the first sign that
>> something is going wrong.
>> 
>
> And suddenly the same PC has "unaged" when reverting to 1.2?
>
> Again, you don't have enough data to be conclusive on that. So I humbly
> suggest that you won't be.
>
>   
___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Darrick Hartman (lists)]

Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 06:33:31PM +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
>> PC's age and when they age, things tend to go wrong, particularly when
>> you upgrade software.  Unusual crashes are usually the first sign that
>> something is going wrong.
> 
> And suddenly the same PC has "unaged" when reverting to 1.2?
> 
> Again, you don't have enough data to be conclusive on that. So I humbly
> suggest that you won't be.

It's more likely that there is something in the configs or dialplan that 
works fine in 1.2 but does not work well in 1.4.  I have several 
machines that I migrated to Asterisk 1.4 that all are behaving just 
fine.  My major motivation for moving to 1.4 was DTMF.

-- 
Darrick Hartman
DJH Solutions, LLC
http://www.djhsolutions.com

___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 06:33:31PM +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
> PC's age and when they age, things tend to go wrong, particularly when
> you upgrade software.  Unusual crashes are usually the first sign that
> something is going wrong.

And suddenly the same PC has "unaged" when reverting to 1.2?

Again, you don't have enough data to be conclusive on that. So I humbly
suggest that you won't be.

-- 
   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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Rob Hillis]

PC's age and when they age, things tend to go wrong, particularly when
you upgrade software.  Unusual crashes are usually the first sign that
something is going wrong.

To me, it sounds like you've put the money into many of the right areas
- segregating your voice and data networks, going with decent phones and
ensuring your power is reliable so it just seems a little strange to go
cheap on the actual server.

It sounds like you've been pretty lucky with this machine - not all
desktop machines are going to be anywhere near that reliable.  The big
thing that server grade machines give you is better quality of parts
that have been extensively tested with a range of operating systems.  I
guess it's up to you - personally, I'd take the warning signs and start
planning to replace the server.  Possibly I'm just a little more
cautious than some.  :)


Ira wrote:
> At 04:44 AM 1/19/2008, you wrote:
>
> Well, it's been very reliable. It's been running 24/7 for 2 years and 
> the only problems have been my putting bugs in the dial plan, 
> problems with SIP providers going broke and trying 1.4.  So how 
> exactly would more expensive hardware have improved my reliability?
>
> I really wanted it to be reliable. I ran a duplicate network for the 
> phones so they don't share bandwidth, I bought good phones. 
> Everything is POE with the POE switch, the Asterisk box and all the 
> networking stuff to the outside on a big UPS.
>
> Do you actually think the odds of a HP desktop sitting on a UPS in a 
> cool corner doing nothing suddenly dying are much greater than a 
> bottom end server box doing the same?  It seems to me unless I want 
> to go dual PS and flash drives that I'm not going to do much better 
> than I have now.
>
> Ira
>
>   
>> What you run it on is very much a function of how reliable you want 
>> the system to be.  The better the hardware, the more reliable it 
>> will be.  If you're running in a business environment, then I 
>> wouldn't recommend anything less than server grade - even if it's 
>> low end server grade.  The company I work for supplies either Dell 
>> PowerEdge 860s (1RU servers that are similar in price to an upper 
>> mid-range desktop) or Dell PowerEdge 840s (tower cases that are 
>> similar in price to a mid-range desktop)
>>
>> Running on cheap hardware is a great way to cost yourself more in 
>> the long run - in lost productivity, lost sales and IT support.
>>
>>
>> 
>>> Except that it's been running 1.2 for 2 years with no problems. It 
>>> has to handle all of about 20 to 30 calls/day so it's not really 
>>> under much load and I see no reason why it should be a problem. If 
>>> not for the TDM404 I would probably try to put it on a NSLU2.  What 
>>> would you recommend I run it on?
>>>   
>
>
> ___
> -- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ira]

At 04:44 AM 1/19/2008, you wrote:

Well, it's been very reliable. It's been running 24/7 for 2 years and 
the only problems have been my putting bugs in the dial plan, 
problems with SIP providers going broke and trying 1.4.  So how 
exactly would more expensive hardware have improved my reliability?

I really wanted it to be reliable. I ran a duplicate network for the 
phones so they don't share bandwidth, I bought good phones. 
Everything is POE with the POE switch, the Asterisk box and all the 
networking stuff to the outside on a big UPS.

Do you actually think the odds of a HP desktop sitting on a UPS in a 
cool corner doing nothing suddenly dying are much greater than a 
bottom end server box doing the same?  It seems to me unless I want 
to go dual PS and flash drives that I'm not going to do much better 
than I have now.

Ira

>What you run it on is very much a function of how reliable you want 
>the system to be.  The better the hardware, the more reliable it 
>will be.  If you're running in a business environment, then I 
>wouldn't recommend anything less than server grade - even if it's 
>low end server grade.  The company I work for supplies either Dell 
>PowerEdge 860s (1RU servers that are similar in price to an upper 
>mid-range desktop) or Dell PowerEdge 840s (tower cases that are 
>similar in price to a mid-range desktop)
>
>Running on cheap hardware is a great way to cost yourself more in 
>the long run - in lost productivity, lost sales and IT support.
>
>
>>
>>Except that it's been running 1.2 for 2 years with no problems. It 
>>has to handle all of about 20 to 30 calls/day so it's not really 
>>under much load and I see no reason why it should be a problem. If 
>>not for the TDM404 I would probably try to put it on a NSLU2.  What 
>>would you recommend I run it on?


___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Rob Hillis]

I wasn't intending to blame Ira for his own problems - I was intending
to point out that running a production system on discarded hardware is a
really bad idea.

I wasn't even suggesting a mammoth server - as you may or may not have
seen in my subsequent reply to him, the place I work for sells fairly
low-end servers as Asterisk boxes which (at least in Australia) are
comparable to mid to upper-mid range desktops in terms of pricing.  90%
of the serious reliability problems I've seen are on hardware that
people have taken the really cheap route on.

Most people seem to think that Asterisk is a really cheap PBX.  While
Asterisk is certainly /cheaper/ than just about all comparable PBXs, if
it's to be done properly and reliably it's certainly not dirt cheap. 
Evaluating Asterisk certainly can be since if it's only a test system,
you can scrounge up some older hardware.  The real mistake is in putting
the older hardware into full production.


Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 06:21:15PM +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
>   
>> I would suspect that your hardware is the cause of your problems. 
>> Running a production PBX system on a discarded desktop system is a
>> /really/ bad idea.
>>
>> I would seriously consider an upgrade to your hardware.
>> 
>
> Well, there is not enough data to suggest that. Before blaming Ira for
> being such a cheap fellow (after all, he didn't buy one of those IBM big
> iorns to run Asterisk on) we should also consider that the upgrade to
> 1.4 probably also involved an upgrade of Zaptel, which *is* kernel
> space.
>
> And maybe there was soemthing completely different. Which is why I asked
> for a trace, to give some sort of direction to see where the problem
> comes from.
>
>   
___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Benny Amorsen]

Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 12:20:56PM -0800, Ira wrote:

> Kernel panics can be caused by buggy kernel code and / or bad hardware.
>
> Buggy userspace should not (by definition) be able to cause them. If
> userspace can, it's a kernel bug.

This is only true when userspace runs non-root. There are many many
ways for root to crash the kernel.


/Benny



___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 06:21:15PM +1100, Rob Hillis wrote:
> I would suspect that your hardware is the cause of your problems. 
> Running a production PBX system on a discarded desktop system is a
> /really/ bad idea.
> 
> I would seriously consider an upgrade to your hardware.

Well, there is not enough data to suggest that. Before blaming Ira for
being such a cheap fellow (after all, he didn't buy one of those IBM big
iorns to run Asterisk on) we should also consider that the upgrade to
1.4 probably also involved an upgrade of Zaptel, which *is* kernel
space.

And maybe there was soemthing completely different. Which is why I asked
for a trace, to give some sort of direction to see where the problem
comes from.

-- 
   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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Rob Hillis]

What you run it on is very much a function of how reliable you want the 
system to be.  The better the hardware, the more reliable it will be.  
If you're running in a business environment, then I wouldn't recommend 
anything less than server grade - even if it's low end server grade.  
The company I work for supplies either Dell PowerEdge 860s (1RU servers 
that are similar in price to an upper mid-range desktop) or Dell 
PowerEdge 840s (tower cases that are similar in price to a mid-range 
desktop)


Running on cheap hardware is a great way to cost yourself more in the 
long run - in lost productivity, lost sales and IT support.



Ira wrote:

At 11:21 PM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
I would suspect that your hardware is the cause of your problems.  
Running a production PBX system on a discarded desktop system is a 
/really/ bad idea.


I would seriously consider an upgrade to your hardware.


Except that it's been running 1.2 for 2 years with no problems. It has 
to handle all of about 20 to 30 calls/day so it's not really under 
much load and I see no reason why it should be a problem. If not for 
the TDM404 I would probably try to put it on a NSLU2.  What would you 
recommend I run it on?


Ira


___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ira]

At 03:35 PM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
>I'm running 1.4 in production on the following two systems:
>
>Tyan GT20 AMD 939 dual core. openSuSE x86_64 10.1
>Celeron 2.4ghz RHEL 4... cheap server from ThePlanet from what I
>recall they use cheap cheap cheap consumer grade stuff.
>
>Not a single crash not a single issue.

Yes I know, most of the people running 1.4 do it without problem 
today, I've tried and failed. I'll try the 1.6 beta Sunday or next 
weekend and see if that will run.  I promise I'm not averse to trying 
early code, I've been beta testing something or another almost 
continuously since I figured out how to break Brief on a Netware 
network in 86 or so.

Ira 


___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ira]

At 02:20 PM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 12:20:56PM -0800, Ira wrote:
> > At 11:53 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
> >
> > Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run
> > for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried
> > about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the
> > latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.
>
>Kernel panics can be caused by buggy kernel code and / or bad hardware.
>
>Buggy userspace should not (by definition) be able to cause them. If
>userspace can, it's a kernel bug.
>
>So can you be more specific about those panics? Do you have traces from
>them?


If I had any idea how I might go about that and if anyone had seemed 
to care I'd have done anything asked. The only Linux box I've ever 
touched is this one and I know just enough to build Asterisk and keep 
it alive. MS-DOS I can do anything in; Windows, close to anything; 
Linux, I'm qualified to turn it on and type "yum update" 
occasionally. I use MC for most everything. Not that I'm not 
interested, it's just not something I need for anything other than Asterisk.

Ira


___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ira]

At 11:21 PM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
I would suspect that your hardware is the cause of your 
problems.  Running a production PBX system on a discarded desktop 
system is a really bad idea.


I would seriously consider an upgrade to your hardware.


Except that it's been running 1.2 for 2 years with no problems. It 
has to handle all of about 20 to 30 calls/day so it's not really 
under much load and I see no reason why it should be a problem. If 
not for the TDM404 I would probably try to put it on a NSLU2.  What 
would you recommend I run it on?


Ira ___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Rob Hillis]

I would suspect that your hardware is the cause of your problems. 
Running a production PBX system on a discarded desktop system is a
/really/ bad idea.

I would seriously consider an upgrade to your hardware.


Ira wrote:
> At 12:34 PM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
>
>   
>>> Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run
>>> for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried
>>> about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the
>>> latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.
>>>
>>> Ira
>>>   
>> What type of Asterisk setup do you have? While my setup is not a large
>> commercial setup I have seen asterisk 1.4 with a few calls going through
>> it at once last for weeks if not months before it was restarted. Just
>> curious.
>> 
>
> 1ghz Celeron, 1 gig ram, 120gb HD. An HP home desktop discarded by a client
> 2 year old Digium 4 FXO port card using only 3 ports and the Digium HP echo 
> can
>
> 3 analog lines in
> 2 SIP lines in
> most outgoing via SIP
> Most incoming via analog
> phones are all Aastra 480i-CT
>
> Dial plan is hand written, likely a bit convoluted, but it's hard to 
> avoid that.
>
> Seems like the panics were mostly to do with ZAP
>
> The internet runs over 192.168.0.XXX
> the phones run on 192.168.233.XXX
> The two networks are completely separate until they reach the router 
> connected to the world.
>
> The only problem I have with the most current 1.2 is every month or 
> three it thinks one of the phones has 5 active lines going and stops 
> sending calls to it, restart gracefully and all is well again.
>
> Ira 
>
>
> ___
> -- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Andrew Joakimsen]

I'm running 1.4 in production on the following two systems:

Tyan GT20 AMD 939 dual core. openSuSE x86_64 10.1
Celeron 2.4ghz RHEL 4... cheap server from ThePlanet from what I
recall they use cheap cheap cheap consumer grade stuff.

Not a single crash not a single issue.

I will admit we run magnitudes more traffic on 1.2 thusfar but I think
we would have seen issues with 1.4 if they were. FWIW I only started
testing 1.4 approx 6 months ago and put it in production approx 3
months ago.

On Jan 18, 2008 3:20 PM, Ira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 11:53 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
>
> >Apart from the fact asterisk 1.2 is in security maintenance
> >mode only and wont get any other bugfixes it will be ok.
> >Please consider using 1.4 as it's the official latest stable
> >version.
>
> Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run
> for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried
> about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the
> latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.
>
> Ira
>
>
>
> ___
> -- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 12:20:56PM -0800, Ira wrote:
> At 11:53 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
> 
> >Apart from the fact asterisk 1.2 is in security maintenance
> >mode only and wont get any other bugfixes it will be ok.
> >Please consider using 1.4 as it's the official latest stable
> >version.
> 
> Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run 
> for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried 
> about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the 
> latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.

Kernel panics can be caused by buggy kernel code and / or bad hardware.

Buggy userspace should not (by definition) be able to cause them. If
userspace can, it's a kernel bug.

So can you be more specific about those panics? Do you have traces from
them?

-- 
   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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ira]

At 12:34 PM 1/18/2008, you wrote:

> > Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run
> > for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried
> > about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the
> > latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.
> >
> > Ira
>
>What type of Asterisk setup do you have? While my setup is not a large
>commercial setup I have seen asterisk 1.4 with a few calls going through
>it at once last for weeks if not months before it was restarted. Just
>curious.

1ghz Celeron, 1 gig ram, 120gb HD. An HP home desktop discarded by a client
2 year old Digium 4 FXO port card using only 3 ports and the Digium HP echo can

3 analog lines in
2 SIP lines in
most outgoing via SIP
Most incoming via analog
phones are all Aastra 480i-CT

Dial plan is hand written, likely a bit convoluted, but it's hard to 
avoid that.

Seems like the panics were mostly to do with ZAP

The internet runs over 192.168.0.XXX
the phones run on 192.168.233.XXX
The two networks are completely separate until they reach the router 
connected to the world.

The only problem I have with the most current 1.2 is every month or 
three it thinks one of the phones has 5 active lines going and stops 
sending calls to it, restart gracefully and all is well again.

Ira 


___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Michiel van Baak]

On 14:34, Fri 18 Jan 08, Ryan Burke wrote:
> 
> 
> > At 11:53 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
> >
> >>Apart from the fact asterisk 1.2 is in security maintenance
> >>mode only and wont get any other bugfixes it will be ok.
> >>Please consider using 1.4 as it's the official latest stable
> >>version.
> >
> > Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run
> > for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried
> > about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the
> > latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.
> >
> > Ira
> 
> What type of Asterisk setup do you have? While my setup is not a large
> commercial setup I have seen asterisk 1.4 with a few calls going through
> it at once last for weeks if not months before it was restarted. Just
> curious.

I follow asterisk 1.4 svn.
I have around 25 customers with avg 10 phones and roughly 20
extensions with avg 10 priorities in every exten.

This is a pure voip setup with IAX2 connections to 4
different ITSP's and SIP to the phones.

There have been some issues in the early versions, but it's
fine now.

-- 

Michiel van Baak
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://michiel.vanbaak.eu
GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x71C946BD

"Why is it drug addicts and computer afficionados are both called 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ryan Burke]

> At 11:53 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
>
>>Apart from the fact asterisk 1.2 is in security maintenance
>>mode only and wont get any other bugfixes it will be ok.
>>Please consider using 1.4 as it's the official latest stable
>>version.
>
> Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run
> for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried
> about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the
> latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.
>
> Ira

What type of Asterisk setup do you have? While my setup is not a large
commercial setup I have seen asterisk 1.4 with a few calls going through
it at once last for weeks if not months before it was restarted. Just
curious.

___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Ira]

At 11:53 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:

>Apart from the fact asterisk 1.2 is in security maintenance
>mode only and wont get any other bugfixes it will be ok.
>Please consider using 1.4 as it's the official latest stable
>version.

Although for some of us, or at least me, no version of 1.4 has run 
for more than 72 hours before generating a kernel panic. I've tried 
about 6 versions, the early ones were good for about 10 minutes, the 
latest one lasted 3 days. Sadly I'm still stuck using the latest 1.2.

Ira 


___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Michiel van Baak]

On 15:00, Thu 17 Jan 08, Matt wrote:
> What are people's thoughts on asterisk 1.2.26?  Any show stopping bugs?

Apart from the fact asterisk 1.2 is in security maintenance
mode only and wont get any other bugfixes it will be ok.
Please consider using 1.4 as it's the official latest stable
version.

-- 

Michiel van Baak
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://michiel.vanbaak.eu
GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x71C946BD

"Why is it drug addicts and computer afficionados are both called 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Steve Davies]

1.2.26 Works a treat here on several 10s of sites - We are just now starting
to look at 1.4.x as it seems that is is begining to stabilise.

Regards,
Steve

On 1/18/08, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ** Bump **
>
> On Jan 17, 2008 3:00 PM, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What are people's thoughts on asterisk 1.2.26?  Any show stopping bugs?
> >
>
>  
___
-- 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-1.2.26.tar.gz Thoughts?

[Matt]

** Bump **

On Jan 17, 2008 3:00 PM, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> What are people's thoughts on asterisk 1.2.26?  Any show stopping bugs?
>
___
-- 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