Hi, Can anyone please let me know what is the latest stable version of asterisk. Thanks, shailesh --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20040118/fa0aba47/attachment.htm
woody+asterisk@solutionsfirst.com.au
2004-Jan-18 20:30 UTC
[Asterisk-Users] Latest version of asterisk
________________________________ From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Shailesh Alluri Sent: Monday, 19 January 2004 8:15 To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Latest version of asterisk Hi, Can anyone please let me know what is the latest stable version of asterisk. There is no version labelled as "stable" as yet. Last week 0.7.0 and 0.7.1 came out, they are the only versions which have come out since 0.5.0 apart from the CVS. So to answer the question behind the question, get 0.7.1. You can download from http://www.bkw.org/asterisk-0.7.1.tar.gz or http://www.bkw.org/asterisk-0.7.1.tgz I think, I'm not sure of the proper place to get it. Cheers, Woody
Hello, I've had Asterisk installed on HT capable machines in both HT mode(with SMP) and non HT mode (with non-SMP) and did not notice any differences functionally between them. The processor load was always less in HT SMP mode than non HT and I have experienced Asterisk deadlocks in both modes so it doesn't really seem to matter if you leave HT on(at least in my experiences). HT basically works by splitting off commands to one of two different virtual processors that both run at about 70% of processor's speed(that's why you may notice compiling to take longer when in HT mode) I have heard of some applications having memory addressing errors with HT but I have not seen any evidence to support that in Asterisk thus far. I'm going to try installing a 4 x T1 card on my Athlon 2xMP server next week and see if Asterisk/Digium performance/compatibility improves over the Intel platform. MATT--- -----Original Message----- From: WipeOut [mailto:wipe_out@users.sourceforge.net] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 2:54 AM To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Latest version of asterisk T. Chan wrote:>Dear All > >Should one enable HT in the chip when running Asterisk or if we don't,would>that offer alot less processing power? > >T >I have read before that HT did not help Asterisk so should be dissabled, but as the chipsets and other hardware get better at using and controlling HT it may help.. Run some tests on your system and see what your conclusions are, then feedback your findings to the list so that others may learn from it.. Later.. _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
I received a good response that recommends Kernel 2.4.0, but is that very old version? Anyone out there who has had experience with running 0.7.1 with a particular version of Kernel and Redhat? THanks Tommy -----Original Message----- From: T. Chan [mailto:tommy.chan@utimail.com] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 12:35 AM To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Cc: Alan Chan Subject: RE: Latest version of asterisk Dear All, Based on your experience and knowledge, which Redhat (7.3, 8 or 9) and which kernel is most stable and reliable running the 0.7.1 version of Asterisk? Thanks Tom --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.563 / Virus Database: 355 - Release Date: 1/17/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.563 / Virus Database: 355 - Release Date: 1/17/2004
Hello, Our max for a single machine is 40 concurrent SIP -> Zap conversations for about a 12 hour period and over 5000 total phone calls per day. We didn't see crashes going over that, but we wanted to be safe and now have 2 identical machines handling upto about 30 concurrent SIP -> Zap calls(3000 phone calls per day), and a third old machine for office use that never gets over 10 concurrent calls. Here's the specs for these systems: - 120 installed hardphones: - 80 x grandstream 102 hardphones - 20 x Sipura analog adapters(2 phones each) - 2 x Asterisk servers - 2.6 GHz Pentium4 800MHz bus w/ HyperThreading enabled - Asus p4c800 800MHz mobo - 2GB DDR400 RAM (This is actually overkill you need 1GB max if you reboot weekly) - 4 x 36GB SCSI drives in RAID 10 w/megaraid card - 3com 905CX ethernet card - Digium quad T1 card - 3 T1's (2 x B8ZS ESF Long Distance and 1 x robbed-bit SF local) - Redhat 9.0 - Asterisk with many modules turned off and no MOH With these servers you can see the load average jump from 0.00 to 6.25 in a matter of a minute and then back down again, all while never dropping a call or crashing. We also recently diagnosed our lock-freeze to the touchy manager interface(if you are logged into the manager interface and you loose connection, the manager outgoing buffer seems to overflow and freeze Asterisk). So it doesn't seem to be a problem of hardware. But we still haven't figured out how to fix it. One note as to Ethernet cards, we actually fried a Realtek 8139 Ethernet card that we had put in a server temporarily as we were doing our testing. It started to generate a lot of errors and dropping packets left and right. When we took it out it was VERY hot. We then put in a 3com 905 card and haven't had an issue with it yet. Hope this helps, MATT--- -----Original Message----- From: T. Chan [mailto:tommy.chan@utimail.com] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 4:49 PM To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Latest version of asterisk Thanks, Matt ! So, am I correct in assuming that there are quite a few (or alot) of us who have had not so good experiences with Asterisk? That Asterisk would crash after it hit a certain number of calls or after a certain period of time with 15-20 calls? I understand that there were others who were able to send a good number of calls through but can anyone tell us if they have had tested and confirmed that Asterisk runs better without or with HT and in terms of number of calls, how many would each one support, in the ballpark? It would also be nice if one could tell us the computer configuration in order to send that many calls without crashing Asterisk. Does it make a difference running the LAN on a ONBOARD LAN card as compared to a PCI Intel or 3COM LAN card, since there is a chance that packets are passing more efficiently on a PCI LAN card? Side question: Is it possible to do passthrough faxing? Like, customers sending me H323 or SIP fax calls and the Asterisk will pass through to another gateway? Anyone successful in doing that? Tommy -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com]On Behalf Of mattf Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 8:32 AM To: 'asterisk-users@lists.digium.com' Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Latest version of asterisk Hello, I've had Asterisk installed on HT capable machines in both HT mode(with SMP) and non HT mode (with non-SMP) and did not notice any differences functionally between them. The processor load was always less in HT SMP mode than non HT and I have experienced Asterisk deadlocks in both modes so it doesn't really seem to matter if you leave HT on(at least in my experiences). HT basically works by splitting off commands to one of two different virtual processors that both run at about 70% of processor's speed(that's why you may notice compiling to take longer when in HT mode) I have heard of some applications having memory addressing errors with HT but I have not seen any evidence to support that in Asterisk thus far. I'm going to try installing a 4 x T1 card on my Athlon 2xMP server next week and see if Asterisk/Digium performance/compatibility improves over the Intel platform. MATT--- -----Original Message----- From: WipeOut [mailto:wipe_out@users.sourceforge.net] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 2:54 AM To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Latest version of asterisk T. Chan wrote:>Dear All > >Should one enable HT in the chip when running Asterisk or if we don't,would>that offer alot less processing power? > >T >I have read before that HT did not help Asterisk so should be dissabled, but as the chipsets and other hardware get better at using and controlling HT it may help.. Run some tests on your system and see what your conclusions are, then feedback your findings to the list so that others may learn from it.. Later.. _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.563 / Virus Database: 355 - Release Date: 1/17/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.563 / Virus Database: 355 - Release Date: 1/17/2004 _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Nope, it's the T400P, the old one that they don't sell anymore. I actually haven't seen any issues with it and RH 9. it seems to run just fine. MATT--- -----Original Message----- From: Aram Ter-Martirosyan [mailto:aram@hi-teck.com] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 11:42 PM To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Latest version of asterisk Hello Matt, Is that the Wildcard TE410P you are using. Digium said that it had some problems with Redhat 9.0 is that correct? - Digium quad T1 card - 3 T1's (2 x B8ZS ESF Long Distance and 1 x robbed-bit SF local) - Redhat 9.0 Aram Ter-Martirosyan Senior Account Manager Hi-Tech Gateway, Inc. http://www.hi-teck.com 1225 Grand Central Ave. Glendale, CA 91201 aram@hi-teck.com tel 818.546.4601 fax 818.546.4617 Turning Technology Into Business Solutions -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com]On Behalf Of mattf Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 6:21 PM To: 'asterisk-users@lists.digium.com' Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Latest version of asterisk Hello, Our max for a single machine is 40 concurrent SIP -> Zap conversations for about a 12 hour period and over 5000 total phone calls per day. We didn't see crashes going over that, but we wanted to be safe and now have 2 identical machines handling upto about 30 concurrent SIP -> Zap calls(3000 phone calls per day), and a third old machine for office use that never gets over 10 concurrent calls. Here's the specs for these systems: - 120 installed hardphones: - 80 x grandstream 102 hardphones - 20 x Sipura analog adapters(2 phones each) - 2 x Asterisk servers - 2.6 GHz Pentium4 800MHz bus w/ HyperThreading enabled - Asus p4c800 800MHz mobo - 2GB DDR400 RAM (This is actually overkill you need 1GB max if you reboot weekly) - 4 x 36GB SCSI drives in RAID 10 w/megaraid card - 3com 905CX ethernet card - Digium quad T1 card - 3 T1's (2 x B8ZS ESF Long Distance and 1 x robbed-bit SF local) - Redhat 9.0 - Asterisk with many modules turned off and no MOH With these servers you can see the load average jump from 0.00 to 6.25 in a matter of a minute and then back down again, all while never dropping a call or crashing. We also recently diagnosed our lock-freeze to the touchy manager interface(if you are logged into the manager interface and you loose connection, the manager outgoing buffer seems to overflow and freeze Asterisk). So it doesn't seem to be a problem of hardware. But we still haven't figured out how to fix it. One note as to Ethernet cards, we actually fried a Realtek 8139 Ethernet card that we had put in a server temporarily as we were doing our testing. It started to generate a lot of errors and dropping packets left and right. When we took it out it was VERY hot. We then put in a 3com 905 card and haven't had an issue with it yet. Hope this helps, MATT--- -----Original Message----- From: T. Chan [mailto:tommy.chan@utimail.com] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 4:49 PM To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Latest version of asterisk Thanks, Matt ! So, am I correct in assuming that there are quite a few (or alot) of us who have had not so good experiences with Asterisk? That Asterisk would crash after it hit a certain number of calls or after a certain period of time with 15-20 calls? I understand that there were others who were able to send a good number of calls through but can anyone tell us if they have had tested and confirmed that Asterisk runs better without or with HT and in terms of number of calls, how many would each one support, in the ballpark? It would also be nice if one could tell us the computer configuration in order to send that many calls without crashing Asterisk. Does it make a difference running the LAN on a ONBOARD LAN card as compared to a PCI Intel or 3COM LAN card, since there is a chance that packets are passing more efficiently on a PCI LAN card? Side question: Is it possible to do passthrough faxing? Like, customers sending me H323 or SIP fax calls and the Asterisk will pass through to another gateway? Anyone successful in doing that? Tommy -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com]On Behalf Of mattf Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 8:32 AM To: 'asterisk-users@lists.digium.com' Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Latest version of asterisk Hello, I've had Asterisk installed on HT capable machines in both HT mode(with SMP) and non HT mode (with non-SMP) and did not notice any differences functionally between them. The processor load was always less in HT SMP mode than non HT and I have experienced Asterisk deadlocks in both modes so it doesn't really seem to matter if you leave HT on(at least in my experiences). HT basically works by splitting off commands to one of two different virtual processors that both run at about 70% of processor's speed(that's why you may notice compiling to take longer when in HT mode) I have heard of some applications having memory addressing errors with HT but I have not seen any evidence to support that in Asterisk thus far. I'm going to try installing a 4 x T1 card on my Athlon 2xMP server next week and see if Asterisk/Digium performance/compatibility improves over the Intel platform. MATT--- -----Original Message----- From: WipeOut [mailto:wipe_out@users.sourceforge.net] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 2:54 AM To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Latest version of asterisk T. Chan wrote:>Dear All > >Should one enable HT in the chip when running Asterisk or if we don't,would>that offer alot less processing power? > >T >I have read before that HT did not help Asterisk so should be dissabled, but as the chipsets and other hardware get better at using and controlling HT it may help.. Run some tests on your system and see what your conclusions are, then feedback your findings to the list so that others may learn from it.. Later.. _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.563 / Virus Database: 355 - Release Date: 1/17/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.563 / Virus Database: 355 - Release Date: 1/17/2004 _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users