matt.riddell@sineapps.com
2004-Aug-31 22:15 UTC
[Asterisk-Users] Line death not recognized on TDM400P?
A customer of mine has 3 TDM400P cards in a box running asterisk. On each card he has four FXO modules. I have set up the dialplan to dial via group 1 for an outgoing call. Channels 1-12 are in group 1. If he plugs a telephone cable into socket 2 or 3 etc, but not 1, when he dials out, it still tries to make the call via socket 1. Straight away the console says that it has dialed the number via g1 and that it is connecting sip/bla with zap/1-1 (or some such)... On my X100P I get a red alarm if the phone cable is not plugged in. Is there any way to do this with the TDM400P? They would like to be able to unplug lines and use them for other purposes at times. Make sense? I kinda thought that asterisk would realise that nothing was connected to the TDM card and try the second socket, the third etc... Any help greatly appreciated. Cheers, Matt Riddell
matt.riddell@sineapps.com
2004-Aug-31 22:36 UTC
[Asterisk-Users] Line death not recognized on TDM400P?
On 1 Sep 2004 at 17:15, matt.riddell@sineapps.com wrote:> A customer of mine has 3 TDM400P cards in a box running asterisk. On > each card he has four FXO modules. > > I have set up the dialplan to dial via group 1 for an outgoing call. > > Channels 1-12 are in group 1. > > If he plugs a telephone cable into socket 2 or 3 etc, but not 1, when > he dials out, it still tries to make the call via socket 1. > > Straight away the console says that it has dialed the number via g1 > and that it is connecting sip/bla with zap/1-1 (or some such)... > > On my X100P I get a red alarm if the phone cable is not plugged in. > Is there any way to do this with the TDM400P? > > They would like to be able to unplug lines and use them for other > purposes at times. > > Make sense? > > I kinda thought that asterisk would realise that nothing was > connected to the TDM card and try the second socket, the third etc... > > Any help greatly appreciated. >The problem is, if lines 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 and 12 are plugged in, you would only be able to make 1 concurrent call...(because the next call would try to go out line two which would never work)...maybe if four people called at the same time only 1 wouldn't get through but then the next call wouldn't get through... Is this so? Matt
Andrew Kohlsmith
2004-Sep-01 06:00 UTC
[Asterisk-Users] Line death not recognized on TDM400P?
On Wednesday 01 September 2004 01:15, matt.riddell@sineapps.com wrote:> They would like to be able to unplug lines and use them for other > purposes at times.Out of curiosity, why are they unplugging the lines? i.e. what are these "other purposes" ? -A.
> A customer of mine has 3 TDM400P cards in a box running asterisk. On > each card he has four FXO modules. > > I have set up the dialplan to dial via group 1 for an outgoing call. > > Channels 1-12 are in group 1. > > If he plugs a telephone cable into socket 2 or 3 etc, but not 1, when > he dials out, it still tries to make the call via socket 1. > > Straight away the console says that it has dialed the number via g1 > and that it is connecting sip/bla with zap/1-1 (or some such)... > > On my X100P I get a red alarm if the phone cable is not plugged in. > Is there any way to do this with the TDM400P? > > They would like to be able to unplug lines and use them for other > purposes at times. > > Make sense? > > I kinda thought that asterisk would realise that nothing was > connected to the TDM card and try the second socket, the third etc...It makes sense, but the code to detect unused rj11's is not in * now. In fact, you'll find that unplugging and replugging the rj11's will cause * to fail after a while. (At least that was the case about a month ago and there really haven't been any changes to the fxo software for some time.) There are no alarms or other indicators available that would suggest a port has failed or is unavailable.
matt.riddell@sineapps.com
2004-Sep-01 18:08 UTC
[Asterisk-Users] Line death not recognized on TDM400P?
On 1 Sep 2004 at 9:00, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:> On Wednesday 01 September 2004 01:15, matt.riddell@sineapps.com wrote: > > They would like to be able to unplug lines and use them for other > > purposes at times. > > Out of curiosity, why are they unplugging the lines? i.e. what are > these "other purposes" ? >Well number 1 was to check what would happen if there was a line failure. But the other purposes were to bring online lots of fax machines in time of need?! Cheers, Matt
Jinsong Liao
2004-Sep-10 16:36 UTC
[Asterisk-Users] Re: Line death not recognized on TDM400P?
Just tried the latest CVS version with "#define ZAP_CHECK_HOOKSTATE" in chan_zap.c. I am using a TDM400P with 4 FXO modules. Only port 1 is connected to a phone line. When * starts, I cannot make any outgoing call. All 4 Zap channels are unavailable. "zap show channel 1" indicated "Actual Hook State: Onhook" just like "zap show channel 2 (or 3, 4)" , even though channel 1 is the one with battery. If I unplug the RJ11 cable and then plug it back in, or if I make an incoming call then hang up, "zap show channel 1" will indicate "Actual Hook State: Offhook". After this I can make outgoing calls as Zap/1-1 is now available. Is there anyway to make * correctly recognize the hook state upon startup? Thanks in advance.> > How's this for service!!!! > > > > > > ==============================================> > 09-02-04 14:00 ZX81 New Bug > > 09-02-04 15:04 markster Bugnote Added: 0013839 > > 09-02-04 15:04 markster Assigned To => markster > > 09-02-04 15:04 markster Resolution open => fixed > > 09-02-04 15:04 markster Status new => resolved > > ==============================================> > > > And: > > > > ==============================================> > Update of /usr/cvsroot/asterisk/channels > > In directory mongoose.digium.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14053/channels > > > > Modified Files: > > chan_zap.c > > Log Message: > > Don't use FXO's with no battery (bug #2359) > > ==============================================> > > > Amazing! That's great! My customer will be really happy! > > > > Mark thanks for this. > > That sounds excellent! But, the comments within the code imply the > change is for T1 interfaces only (maybe not the TDM card?). > > Just sent a note off to Mark asking for clearification as to which > interfaces it actually applies to. > > Rich