ATAs with the PA168 - a very popular chip with quite a few of Chinese
manufacturers.
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Lewis
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 4:36 PM
To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Subject: [Asterisk-Users]
Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] A bit of a survey: What do do if
youneedmorethan4 C.O. lines
On February 20, 2005 01:41 am, Michael Giagnocavo wrote:
Well, sure, if you want to spend 8x the amount, yea, it's going to be a
much nicer setup.
Show me
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Kohlsmith
On February 20, 2005 09:25 am, Michael Giagnocavo wrote:
Sorry, I understood the O.P. already had the hardware bought and
installed
and simply wanted to throw on an extra line.
You understood correctly; But again even a TDM401P is $133
If you have a TDM card already, buying a T1, channelbank, etc. to add a few
lines is the stupidest thing I've heard of today.
Have you looked into buying some cheap multiport ATAs? 2 port SIP/IAX2 ATA
should be around $70-80?
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Commercial Discussion'
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] A bit of a survey: What do do if
youneedmorethan 4 C.O. lines
On February 20, 2005 12:26 am, Michael Giagnocavo wrote:
If you have a TDM card already, buying a T1, channelbank, etc. to add a
few
lines is the stupidest thing I've heard of today.
I
PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Intermediary jitter buffering
On Feb 12, 2005, at 9:10 PM, Michael Giagnocavo wrote:
Hello,
I understand that only the destination of a call should do jitter
buffering. So, if IAX2/PhoneA calls
Hello,
I understand that only the destination of a call should do jitter
buffering. So, if IAX2/PhoneA calls IAX2/PhoneB through my server (no
transfers), PhoneA and PhoneB need to perform their own jitter buffering,
and Asterisk will just forward the frames, correct?
What
: RE: [Asterisk-Users] Codec passthrough patch for IAX
Hmm... What's the status of this? This would allow me to declare one of
my incoming DIDs a fax-number by forcing it to use ulaw.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Giagnocavo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005
Hi there,
I had a problem, basically, I have 4 different types of end users
(gsm, ilbc, g729, ulaw). However, I only have one user with my DID provider.
My provider supports all 4 codecs. The issue is then: When an incoming call
comes in, a codec is negotiated (usually ULAW), later on,
Actually, there are some phones that will do inband DTMF over IAX2. So if
he's using one of these, he has to make sure his settings are correct. Yes,
the PA168 phones. The correct setting is RFC2833 for IAX (inside these
phones). Otherwise it's inband. The other options they provide just cut the
of the option provided
it doesn't work.
Could it be their phone system?
--
#Joseph
On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 21:36 -0600, Michael Giagnocavo wrote:
Actually, there are some phones that will do inband DTMF over IAX2. So if
he's using one of these, he has to make sure his settings are correct.
Yes,
the PA168
it be their phone system?
--
#Joseph
On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 21:36 -0600, Michael Giagnocavo wrote:
Actually, there are some phones that will do inband DTMF over IAX2. So
if
he's using one of these, he has to make sure his settings are correct.
Yes,
the PA168 phones. The correct setting is RFC2833
Hello there,
I've successfully compiled the G729 DLL for FireFly. However, I'd
like to hook up some customers using this, and I'm not sure how I can
license it. Everything seems to point to buying thousands of G729 licenses
at a time (from Sipro), and the Virbiage site doesn't mention
I'll agree with that sentence. There are many times when even STUN and so on
isn't going to help. In Guatemala, a lot of people end up with private IPs,
behind two NATs, etc. I've seen them aggressively timeout connections, limit
the range of ports available for NAT (to a ridiculously low number),
when their network shifts
and SIP suddenly stops working.
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: Charles S. Antrim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 11:57 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion; Michael
Giagnocavo
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users
Oh no, it does lots. Data coercion (i.e., corruption) is it's specialty.
Insert a string into a number... and you get 0! Isn't that great? No more
errors. MySql is for people who like Visual Basic's On Error Resume Next
(aka 'ignore all errors and just produce screwed up results').
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 01:06:38PM -0600, Michael Giagnocavo wrote:
Oh no, it does lots. Data coercion (i.e., corruption) is it's specialty.
Insert a string into a number... and you get 0! Isn't that great? No more
errors. MySql is for people who like Visual Basic's On Error Resume
Next
(aka
-Original Message-
Bummer. Glad I don't run a business in Israel. Thought it was bad here
in New Zealand! I'd hate to have my business phone cut off because
someone saw an increased call volume!
It's such a big deal (For instance, here in Guatemala), they have dedicated
people who
If you do it in a low volume fashion, it's very difficult for the telco or
the regulators
to catch up, also you can argue that you are not doing any economic profit
of that. Let's
say, even if bellster uses +240 min/day of your phone, that hardly is
noticeable for
them.
No, it's quite noticeable
Yep, same here in Guatemala. Their software flags your line as suspicious if
your calling patterns are odd. Snip snip goes your line. (Of course, so they
can charge $0.10 a minute internationally, while charging $0.02 locally.)
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes, the IAXy has faults, but until other IAX2 devices ship, it's the
only game in town. I know that the Farfon device will be out soon and
we'll be able to judge its quality at that time.
Or any PA168 phones, which are already out, and support IAX2, SIP, H323,
MGCP and N2P. (I've got one on my
My advice, not having used a WiSIP phone, is to use an FXS port and plug a
normal cordless phone in. It'll save you all potential problems, and if you
don't like the phone, you can just plug any other one on the market in.
In a home environment, I'm not quite sure I see the benefit of wifi. Esp.
That firmware does NOT work. From what I can tell, with that firmware, when
you select IAX2, it actually uses the Net2Phone protocol. In other words,
the IAX2 support doesn't exist, and is just an alias for N2P. Indeed, from
what I've seen, the phones will even say N2P when booting.
We have some
Just a quick reminder, MS SQL on Windows is hands down the best
performing transact SQL database on the planet, and Oracle on Windows is
a close #2. Some might argue that Oracle is #1 and MS is #2. Anyone that
Does Oracle have a decent-featured free version of their db software? That
was my
Any particular reason you want to do it in .NET and MS SQL? I personally
would write applications in something a bit more portable. Just curious.
MS SQL 2005 Express is probably the best free DB out there? And I run lots
of Mono code just fine...
I want to tie my web application (built using
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclientie=UTF-8q=does+asterisk+sup
port+prepaid+calling+card+applications
Second result is :
http://www.voip-info.org/tiki-index.php?page=Asterisk+Prepaid+Applications
Lists a bunch of apps.
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I disagree completely,
We provide VOIP services (in the final testing phases), and there is
more interest in unlimited than in per minute rates.
We have run the stats and our unlimited plans are prices so that we get
more than what the end user uses. (on average, that is)
You're referring to
I disagree. More users on the phone = more minutes used. If only one
user was on the phone at the time = .02 cents a minute= out of business.
If 10 users are all on the phone at the same time, .02*10 = .20 per
minute = CHA-CHING. Providers gladly accept multiple connections. Good
Well for example : use SIP on your LAN an use IAX to connect the outside
world ...
Yes, I'll second that need.
-Michael
___
Asterisk-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
To UNSUBSCRIBE or
Perhaps your dialplan has another match possibility, and it's waiting for
the timeout to evaluate what you've dialed?
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:15 AM
To: [EMAIL
Hi Angel,
It is working pretty well. I think it will be available about the end
of the year. I will not be free. It will be supplied with a
commercially licenced Asterisk.
Here's a question: if the author has purchased a commercial license to
use Asterisk, and I get binary modules from
Further, for Digium to present a list of who does have a commercial license
would not be in their interest as that can undermine the customers
marketing
plans and effective use of their license.
So chill out and wait to hear from Digium, don't get into the middle of a
legal scene you know
Why yet another project proposal? Because the majority of those I have
seen so far are web (PHP)-based, which often presumes UNIX admin
experience. The Web paradigm may be easy to access and easy to develop,
but in terms of administration it is limiting (IMO anyway). Many
projects also require
Further, that really does seem to fly in the face of the spirit of the GPL,
and this is touched on by the GPL FAQ:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCReleaseUnderGPLAndNF
To release a non-free program is always ethically tainted
What's this guy smoking? Oh well, let's let Stallman
Well, see what I said. If you want to be a contributor to this allegedly
free software project, you are forced to sign away your rights.
I'm struggling to think of another free software project where contributed
code bearing an identical GPL or BSD license would require any such
additional
Don't most major Open Source projects ask that patches be e-mailed to
a dev mailing list? Isn't the only problem with this patch that they
didn't include the mailing list because it was of no consequence to
the majority of Asterisk users?
Well, I was not going to this thread, but if you're
Well, it's better than having it state regulated.
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of james
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 1:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Is this good or bad
The FCC is now the governing
They send patches out by email? Who thought of this brilliant idea? Hmm,
let's teach our users not to be cautious.
/me wonders when someone on linux is gonna install a patch that
compromises their system cause some email said so
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the patch is pure c code. it took me 5 mins to read understand
it. is very simple (but useful).
Simply that patch (apart from adding some logs, comments
and little code formatting) simply caches auth data
AND let * manage 403 responses from the server,
and this last one perhaps is the issue that
If you're joking, :).
If you're serious, go read a primer on security.
Do you patch your kernel the same way?
No. I was speaking of THAT patch.
that one is not so difficult, imho.
a more difficult one, of course, must be
understood before. or let someone that can
do for you.
Is not a
I can confirm that the patch is legit. Olle wrote it up last week and
we have been testing the patch for several days. I have installed it on
all of my Asterisk boxes and it appears to do no harm.
That's not the point. The point is distributing patches via email is a
horrible way to do
I don't see a security issue with his method.
If you (a) read the entire patch and (b) comprehend fully everything that
it does, then there's nothing to worry about. Fear comes from the unknown,
and if you know everything in the patch, there's nothing to fear.
I'll agree if you fully
Sometimes I see in a context NoOp
What is the purpose of NoOp (no operation) if it does nothing?
Google for: Asterisk NoOp
http://www.voip-info.org/wiki-Asterisk+cmd+NoOp
-Michael
___
Asterisk-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In any case, the patch has been positively identified as being genuine.
Which one? Anyone who got an email like that?
Get the point? :)
-Michael
___
Asterisk-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The links in an email can also be easily forged. I'm receiving several
pishing emails from paypal and others with perfectly looking links to
forged sites. You cannot trust email links either.
Sure, if you're using HTML email :). That's why most places tell people to
type thesite.com in the URL
Why don't you make your disdain known to Broadvoice, rather than
Asterisk users? To claim that someone opens a security hole by
For the same reason this was originally posted to the asterisk-user list.
accepting a verified patch via email, is the same as claiming that you
never have a security
The WiSIP phone supports WEP 128 encryption. Not sure if it supports WPA
encryption, but that'd be your best bet. I'd use maximum encryption, and
separate your AP from your regular network. Just plug an AP into another
Ethernet card on your Asterisk server. The phones only need to talk to the
Think of it as a dinky little $0.50 padlock on your storage shed. If a
thief cuts the lock, they are in a lot more trouble than just opening
the door.
Separate WLAN (ie not with your normal phones, and not with your
workstations), and WEP (even 64 bit) will keep people out of it. Not
having a
MSN Messenger doesnt support SIP
AFAIK, since its not the Enterprise
version. Windows Messenger is the one youre looking for.
-Michael
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Obradovic
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 9:51
AM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
CoLinux works great for IAX to IAX or SIP to IAX where no Disk Access is
taking place.
Thanks for clearing that up. I had been using it for IVRs. So if I
created a
RAM disk for CoLinux and booted it from there... that might work?
You know, that would be an interesting project, and I'd bet
Maybe they switched to a codec that doesn't support inband DTMF and it isn't
configured to use SIP INFO or likewise?
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kanuri, Seshu
(Company IT)
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 12:53 PM
To:
Yo estoy armando un Asterisk pero el PSTN Gateway es un CIsco 2610.
Has tenido buenos resultados con la E1 directamente en el Linux? Te
demande mucho hardware?
Le metimos mucho hard para estar seguros (usamos 729, q come MUCHO)
Como que tanto hardware usaste? Dual Xeon 3Ghz o...? Y de
Yes, there is network support.
I tried it out, but the voice quality seemed quite choppy (local machine, P4
3GHz). Not sure if it'd actually work for any near-production scenarios.
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Craig Guy
Sent:
No worries here. What works best will win out eventually.
Not sure where you get that idea, as historically it's not that way :S.
Companies will make SIP work reasonably enough. What will win out is
whatever is marketed and sold the best. Getting published specs, inc. being
a published standard
You might also want to consider MS Virtual Server, as it is geared more to
running as a service. VMware workstation / VirtualPC are more like desktop
tools (although I think they have some higher-end server-like products, but
I haven't used them).
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:asterisk-users-[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Totaro
I predict a paradigm shift, rendering what is historical, null.
Is this in general, applying to all technology, or just to telecom? (i.e.,
will Hollywood ship videos in hi-def on EVD?)
-Michael
No
Unless SIP just plain does not work, I think it'll be hard (for IAX to get
excellent acceptance), without a lot of good marketing and other efforts by
Digium. At VON, only a few people even understood what Asterisk was, let
alone even had heard of IAX.
Even with IT people controlling things you
Great, now that you've proved you're an 31337 professional, not a windoze
luser, equated Windows to drugs, and made it clear that Windows isn't used
in any real business, can we move on to another topic?
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:13:15 -0600, Michael Giagnocavo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless SIP just plain does not work, I think it'll be hard (for IAX to
get
excellent acceptance),
Funny you should say that from the comfort of your first world
environment. In many countries internet infrastructure
As far as I understand, corporation, and Govt's like
commercial products because of the issue of liability. That is why the
Commercial market and Govt market don't accept open source solutions.
Both governments (Germany anyone?) and commercial
entities (quite a few people have made
Precisely. First world environment!
Try travelling in Africa, the Middle East and South Asia, where
everything is still mostly dialup and many of the phone wires
installed go back before the time when plastic was invented.
So SIP doesn't work on dialup? That's funny 'cause I'm using it like
If
I only ran linux, I'd not even be able to connect to the Internet, since
all I have is
an EVDO/CDMA PCMCIA modem that barely has working drivers for
Windows.
I wouldn't attempt
to get on the highway riding a rusty old tricycle, nor would I entrust my penguin to such a
device. Perhaps
I think his point is that for a commercial rollout (say, a VSP), IAX is not
practical for all clients right now. It's not strange to have a personal
preference that is technically better but not commercially viable. That's
not an insult, just how things are sometimes. Maybe if there were some ~$70
The only thing wrong with RedHat as far as asterisk is concerned is that
they do something goofy with their kernels and all you need do is recompile
a kernel from source. IMHO, you should always compile a kernel for your
specific hardware.
Does this mean that RHEL wouldn't really be a benefit
I don't want to even guess what kinda response this is gonna get... did you
even bother using Google? The first result is a store that sells sparco
office supplies... perhaps badgering them could turn up a lead?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
They could send lots of traffic and DoS you sure... nothing specific to
Asterisk.
Otherwise, they'd have to rely on a security hole in the software itself. I
don't know of any, and I'm sure they'd get fixed really fast if they were
found...
-Michael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Well, config files don't link or form part of the program itself, so even if
they were compiled, it wouldn't fall under GPL. GPL concerns the source, not
input or output (otherwise everything that ever dealt with a GPL program
would have to be GPL'd).
-Michael
-Original Message-
From:
Have you tried contacting Microsoft? Depending on the situation, you might
be able to get very low prices or even free (yes, as in cost) licenses for
your desktops. Microsoft can be very generous with non-profit and aid
organizations.
Just from a practical standpoint, that might be easier since
Why must you move all of your computers over to Windows - Causing this
hassle... Why not keep them how they are? I don't understand the move
that would only make this whole job harder.
He wanted to get away from Microsoft licensing.
Did he want to get away from MS *licensing* (in a
Well, if you get MS to license you, then you can all run Outlook 2003 / XP
or any older flavour if you so choose.
If you've got moral objections or whatever, that's a separate issue that I'm
not gonna get into here (I doubt my take on these issues, nor my closeness
to MS would go well here :)).
Sorry for the Top Posting but where is this discussion leading to? I do
not want this to turn into a Windows Vs Linux thread, please
Are we not digressing a little too far from Asterisk discussion??
He posted with a few different problems. His persistent problem with MS
was about his setup
bt should do it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Oscar Bults
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 2:14 PM
To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] Error starting Asterisk.
..I got the
What differences between IAX2 and SIP did you see? What sat provider are you
using? And what's your average bandwidth available?
I'm in Guatemala, and I know some people on satellite would be overjoyed to
find a working VoIP solution. Unfortunately, it's mainly DirecWay, and they
really suck
than SIP.
I only have made some tests and i had a better conversation Using IAX.
Regards ,
-Jefferson Carvalho
Michael Giagnocavo wrote:
What differences between IAX2 and SIP did you see? What sat provider are
you
using? And what's your average bandwidth available?
I'm in Guatemala
I'm using an EV-DO modem here in Guatemala, but I see that the ping times
are ~200-400ms to the ISPs machines (i.e., the first hop is most of the
time). Some people are a bit less (say ~100-200ms). Is this normal, or is
the ISP screwed up (as usual)?
-Michael
-Original Message-
From:
or
if policy is not followed, well then Bad Things are MUCH more likely to
occur. With or without source being available.
I suppose that having source can make the possibility for the occurance of
Bad
Things marginally higher but it all comes down to design and policy, IMO.
And thus, you've
Question: If I just want to provide IP Telephony within the school and have
no
outside connections to the local phone system I suspect I can install
Asterisk
on a RH Linux server and plug in a bunch of IP Telephones on the network,
config it all and it will work. The only cost to the school would
I don't know. I've been in a position where it's been a concern. Have
you?
That condition should never come up.
A lot of things that shouldn't happen do. I think that's partially why
there's a legal system to begin with...
However, the electronics shop staff at many larger hospital
The issue isn't building the software. The issue is in taking the new
software and installing it on a system that they have absolutely no
authority
to install it on, ending up killing someone and then pointing back at the
source vendor and saying but they gave me the source! How was I
15 October 2004 16:22, Michael Giagnocavo wrote:
problem lies in the policy for upgrading or installing software on
life-critical machines not being followed.
I agree with that. But, what's going to be held up in court? As a lawyer
for a medical equipment corp, which route are you going to take
80 matches
Mail list logo
