asterisk users - Feb 2006 - Multiple TDM400P's in a single machine

Hi All,

 

Can someone give me a definite answer as to wether or not you can
reliably run multiple TDM400P's in the same machine?

I need 4 x FXO and 4 x FXS to connect to both the PSTN and existing key
system, but I have seen several threads suggesting that this is not a
supported configuration

 

Thanks,

 

Marc.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20060220/1b81acca/attachment.htm

Hello, Marc!

At 06:24 PM 02/20/2006, you wrote:
>Can someone give me a definite answer as to wether or not you can 
>reliably run multiple TDM400P's in the same machine?
>I need 4 x FXO and 4 x FXS to connect to both the PSTN and existing 
>key system, but I have seen several threads suggesting that this is 
>not a supported configuration
According to "Asterisk: The Future Of Telephony":

IRQ latency
Interrupt request (IRQ) latency is basically the delay between the moment a
peripheral card (such as a telephone interface card) requests that the CPU stop
what it's doing and the moment when the CPU actually responds and is ready
to
handle the task. Asterisk's peripherals (especially the Zaptel cards) 
are extremely
intolerant of IRQ latency.

Linux has historically had problems with its ability to service IRQs
quickly; this problem has caused enough trouble for audio developers
that several patches have been created to address this shortcoming. So
far, there has been some mild controversy over how to incorporate
these patches into the Linux kernel.

Because the Digium cards require so much, it is generally recommended that
only one Digium card be run in a system. If you require more 
connectivity than a
single card can provide, either replace your existing card with one 
of higher density,
or add another server to your environment.*

* Many people report that Sangoma cards are more robust when it comes 
to dealing with unpredictable motherboard
chipsets, and thus can handle sharing motherboard IRQ resources. 
Regardless, it is still worth considering
using multiple servers, as the redundancy that can be gained from 
this strategy can quickly offset the cost.

--
Alexander Burke, A+, CCNA
Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Marc:

At 06:24 PM 02/20/2006, you wrote:
>I need 4 x FXO and 4 x FXS to connect to both the PSTN and existing 
>key system, but I have seen several threads suggesting that this is 
>not a supported configuration
This bad boy might be what you need:
http://www.digium.com/index.php?menu=product_detail&category=hardware&product=TDM2400P&tab=details

If not, consider an external channel bank:
http://www.voipsupply.com/product_info.php?products_id=868
http://www.voipsupply.com/product_info.php?products_id=781

It would be great if you could let the list know which route you 
take, and the success (or lack thereof) that you have with it!

--
Alexander Burke, A+, CCNA
Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Marc Archer wrote:
> Can someone give me a definite answer as to wether or not you can 
> reliably run multiple TDM400P?s in the same machine?
> 
> I need 4 x FXO and 4 x FXS to connect to both the PSTN and existing key 
> system, but I have seen several threads suggesting that this is not a 
> supported configuration
> 
>  
Potentially easier and cheaper is to just have the FXO's and connect it 
as analog extensions.  That's what we did here.  It serves as a 
replacement voicemail system, and IVR while still being able to answer 
and route calls, provide gateway to voip extensions, etc.

Less waste, too, if/when you completely switch to voip.  FXO ports are 
likely to be more usable than FXS if that becomes the case, I would imagine.

That said, I think some folks have run multiple TDM400's by making sure 
they have unique IRQ's.  I'll let somebody else speak to the details of 
that.


Phil

Am Tuesday 21 February 2006 00:24 schrieb Marc Archer:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> Can someone give me a definite answer as to wether or not you can
> reliably run multiple TDM400P's in the same machine?
>
> I need 4 x FXO and 4 x FXS to connect to both the PSTN and existing key
> system, but I have seen several threads suggesting that this is not a
> supported configuration
>
>
i have two tdm400p's  (2xFXO, 6xFXS) in one desktop machine used as asterisk
server for a small office (so the pc hardware is nothing special).
This configuration is running since two weeks without any problems!


>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Marc.

I am running 2 TDM400's in a single machine without a drama. It is a 
scenario that will work, but you have to be careful with your PCI slots 
and IRQ assignments. I basically disabled everything on board that was 
not needed (USB, floppy, IDE2 etc) and had to play around with which 
slot the cards went in to ensure that neither of the TDM cards were 
sharing resources with something else like the on board eth controller.

You can check that nothing is overlapping by checking the interrupts file -

[dnsadmin@sybdev dnsadmin]$ cat /proc/interrupts
            CPU0       CPU1
   0:  290358233  290361097    IO-APIC-edge  timer
   1:          1          7    IO-APIC-edge  keyboard
   2:          0          0          XT-PIC  cascade
   8:          0          1    IO-APIC-edge  rtc
  12:         26         23    IO-APIC-edge  PS/2 Mouse
  14:    5352052    5654300    IO-APIC-edge  ide0
  16: 2872787990 2934678034   IO-APIC-level  wctdm
  17: 2934636010 2872725440   IO-APIC-level  wctdm
  19:   46509717         13   IO-APIC-level  usb-uhci, eth0
NMI:          0          0
LOC:  580765319  580765318
ERR:          0
MIS:          0
[dnsadmin@sybdev dnsadmin]$


as you can see, in this setup, the usb bus and the eth controller are 
sharing, but the tdm cards are on their own. With certain configs, 1 of 
the tdm cards was sharing with the eth controller, so was just a case of 
  trying different combinations to make sure there was no sharing.

One other thing you might want to consider is instead of going for 2 
TDM400's, put in 1 TDM2400 with 1 bank of FXO and 1 bank of FXS - the 
price isnt too much different and you have room to grow. This is the 
config we are running with for all new systems from now on that require 
more than 4 FXO/FXS ports.


Cheers,


Ben

Marc Archer wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
>  
> 
> Can someone give me a definite answer as to wether or not you can 
> reliably run multiple TDM400P?s in the same machine?
> 
> I need 4 x FXO and 4 x FXS to connect to both the PSTN and existing key 
> system, but I have seen several threads suggesting that this is not a 
> supported configuration
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> Marc.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
> 
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Depending on the setup, you might actually need 8 x FXO.

PaulH
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Marc Archer 
  To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 10:24 AM
  Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Multiple TDM400P's in a single machine


  Hi All,

   

  Can someone give me a definite answer as to wether or not you can reliably run
multiple TDM400P's in the same machine?

  I need 4 x FXO and 4 x FXS to connect to both the PSTN and existing key
system, but I have seen several threads suggesting that this is not a supported
configuration

   

  Thanks,

   

  Marc.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --

  Asterisk-Users mailing list
  To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
     http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20060220/4cb79dd1/attachment.htm

> I am running 2 TDM400's in a single machine without a drama. It is a
> scenario that will work, but you have to be careful with your PCI
slots
> and IRQ assignments. I basically disabled everything on board that was
> not needed (USB, floppy, IDE2 etc) and had to play around with which
> slot the cards went in to ensure that neither of the TDM cards were
> sharing resources with something else like the on board eth
controller.
>From what I understand about the way the TDM400 cards work, it may be
possible to disable the interrupt on one card and service both cards on
the remaining interrupt. There may be some extra (hardware?)
synchronisation required between the two cards, which would make the
idea a bit less attractive.

This only solves the problem of interrupt availability/sharing though,
not the fact that you still have to do approximately the same amount of
work per interrupt.

James

Marc,
I have a box with two TDM400P's. All of the ports are
FXO's. System is working fine on CentOS.

Regards,
Dovid
> Can someone give me a definite answer as to wether
> or not you can
> reliably run multiple TDM400P's in the same machine?
> 
> I need 4 x FXO and 4 x FXS to connect to both the
> PSTN and existing key
> system, but I have seen several threads suggesting
> that this is not a
> supported configuration


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

> 
> 3 TDM cards here, I had artifacts if any of the cards were sharing
> interrupts, the trick was to add the cards 1 at the time to get them
> each on their own irq. The system isn't in production yet, so I
don't
> know how well it'll hold up under load, so far so good in testing
> though.
> 9xFXO 1xFXS 2xUnused
> 
Now that's impressive :)

For everyone about to shout out that 3 x TDM400's are probably more
expensive (and probably more trouble) than a single TDM2400, remember
that the TDM2400 is a new beast and probably isn't approved for use yet
in a few countries. AFAIK I couldn't even buy one from an Australian
reseller, let alone legally connect it to the public telephone network
here!

James