asterisk users - Dec 2003 - snom X MOH

Hi all!

I updated my snom200 to 2.02t and now MOH from * don?t works anymore... only the
MOH from snom server and if i clear the MOH server field in the phone i have no
MOH at all..( with the transfer button, moh plays using  a extension).

Someone with that problem? 

I downgrade to 2.01s but nothing changes.

Miklos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20031208/4404cfcd/attachment.htm

At 12:23 PM 12/8/2003, "listas iPfone" <listas@ipfone.com.br>
wrote:
>I updated my snom200 to 2.02t and now MOH from * don?t works anymore... 
>only the MOH from snom server and if i clear the MOH server field in the 
>phone i have no MOH at all..( with the transfer button, moh plays using  a 
>extension).
>
>Someone with that problem?
I am having the same problem. You can resolve it temporarily by downgrading 
to the 1.6.x series of SNOM. I am BCC'ing this email to a SNOM 
representative who is working on this issue.

--Ernest
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20031208/d9ad8744/attachment.htm

Hi!

Only to make clear...

As a brazilian..i love the "bossa nova" MOH from snom  and the sound
quality is very good.

Yesterday it was playing "barquinho" from Jo?o Gilberto :-))

regards

Miklos
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Christian Stredicke 
  To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com 
  Cc: 'Robert Messer' ; 'Kevin' ; listas@ipfone.com.br ;
ernest@oacys.com ; markster@marko.net
  Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 7:22 AM
  Subject: AW: [Asterisk-Users] snom X MOH


  Dear All,



  it seems there is some confusion about using MOH correctly. 



  RFC3264 (http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc3264.txt?number=3264) describes the usage of
the a=recvonly and sendonly parameters of SDP. Using the address 0.0.0.0 is
depreciated. We have moved to be RFC3264 compatible and seems to cause the
problem. It seems other vendors did not do this step yet; however I assume that
they will follow sooner or later.



  Now what can we do? Option A would be moving snom backwards and use 0.0.0.0.
Option B would be to move Asterisk forward and handle the a=sendxxxx tags. As I
am generally against moving backward, I think its better to include RFC3264
handling in Asterisk. Until then, using snom2.02t together with the current
Asterisk will result in missing music on hold.



  If there should be any bug on our side using RFC3264 correctly, we will surely
fix this as soon as possible.



  Best,



  Christian 



  -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
  Von: Kevin [mailto:kmoroz@abpintl.com] 
  Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. Dezember 2003 04:50
  An: cs@snom.de
  Cc: 'Robert Messer'
  Betreff: FW: [Asterisk-Users] snom X MOH



  Hi CS, 



     Hope all is well.  Did mr. Spence get back to you on this?  I think I sent
you all the info you needed.  It appears other asterisk users are hitting this
problem on 2.0 and don't like it!!  Can you check it out?



  Thanks,



  Kevin



  -----Original Message-----
  From: Ernest W. Lessenger [mailto:ernest@oacys.com] 
  Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 3:44 PM
  To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
  Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] snom X MOH



  At 12:23 PM 12/8/2003, "listas iPfone" <listas@ipfone.com.br>
wrote:



  I updated my snom200 to 2.02t and now MOH from * don?t works anymore... only
the MOH from snom server and if i clear the MOH server field in the phone i have
no MOH at all..( with the transfer button, moh plays using  a extension).
   
  Someone with that problem? 


  I am having the same problem. You can resolve it temporarily by downgrading to
the 1.6.x series of SNOM. I am BCC'ing this email to a SNOM representative
who is working on this issue.

  --Ernest
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20031209/ac19e18a/attachment.htm