Asterisk 1.2 has no support of t.38 whatsoever, the call will drop before t.38 is ever utilised, not even pass-thru. 1.4 Adds support for T.38 pass through only and no other sort of faxing, the endpoint must support T.38 and you must send your call to a T.38 gateway and you must not use NAT anywhere in your network and you must enable re-invites which could cause CDRs not to reflect the true details of the call. Asterisk/Digium also has no interest in any further interest in expanding T.38 or faxing support in Asterisk. Steve Underwood and the other fine persons that have helped to develop the software DSPs and other stuff required for FoIP support also have no interest in writing any further faxing support for Asterisk (RxFax, TxFax + the newest span_dsp wont even compile, much less work under Asterisk any more) probably because they know it will never be included into the Asterisk code. On 2/5/07, Checkov, Andrew <acheck@astelnet.net> wrote:> Some addition: I tried the same boxes with Asterisk 1.2 and 1.4 - no success > at all - it seems that you can get T.38 with Asterisk ONLY with > Reinvite enabled (but it doesn't work reliable in case of NAT) - > no T.38 passthrough as with openpbx.org. >
Savoy, Kevin - Williston, ND
2007-Feb-05 08:11 UTC
[asterisk-users] Asterisk Faxing Support
I find this surprising. Is this fact? I don't see faxing disappearing anytime soon. I'm surprised Asterisk/Digium would ignore it and not try to support it. If people are to replace their old PBX's with Asterisk faxing is almost always going to be required. We have an old POTS line for faxing but it would be nice to get rid of it. For Asterisk/Digium to drop supporting faxes seems odd and doesn't make good business sense. I know a lot of people that will simply not give up faxing because of legal documents. I believe it should be built in since every other PBX system out there does it. If Asterisk/Digium are truly trying to supplant legacy PBX's faxing should be included. My two cents (a nickel with inflation) I'm off my soap box for now. -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Joakimsen Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 2:57 AM To: acheck@astelnet.net; Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: [asterisk-users] Asterisk Faxing Support Asterisk 1.2 has no support of t.38 whatsoever, the call will drop before t.38 is ever utilised, not even pass-thru. 1.4 Adds support for T.38 pass through only and no other sort of faxing, the endpoint must support T.38 and you must send your call to a T.38 gateway and you must not use NAT anywhere in your network and you must enable re-invites which could cause CDRs not to reflect the true details of the call. Asterisk/Digium also has no interest in any further interest in expanding T.38 or faxing support in Asterisk. Steve Underwood and the other fine persons that have helped to develop the software DSPs and other stuff required for FoIP support also have no interest in writing any further faxing support for Asterisk (RxFax, TxFax + the newest span_dsp wont even compile, much less work under Asterisk any more) probably because they know it will never be included into the Asterisk code. On 2/5/07, Checkov, Andrew <acheck@astelnet.net> wrote:> Some addition: I tried the same boxes with Asterisk 1.2 and 1.4 - nosuccess> at all - it seems that you can get T.38 with Asterisk ONLY with > Reinvite enabled (but it doesn't work reliable in case of NAT) - > no T.38 passthrough as with openpbx.org. >_______________________________________________ --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
In article <23fd749a0702050057l24216509yb87879ba8c48f676@mail.gmail.com>, joakimsen@gmail.com says...> Asterisk 1.2 has no support of t.38 whatsoever, the call will drop > before t.38 is ever utilised, not even pass-thru. > > 1.4 Adds support for T.38 pass through only and no other sort of > faxing, the endpoint must support T.38 and you must send your call to > a T.38 gateway and you must not use NAT anywhere in your network and > you must enable re-invites which could cause CDRs not to reflect the > true details of the call. > > Asterisk/Digium also has no interest in any further interest in > expanding T.38 or faxing support in Asterisk. > > Steve Underwood and the other fine persons that have helped to develop > the software DSPs and other stuff required for FoIP support also have > no interest in writing any further faxing support for Asterisk (RxFax, > TxFax + the newest span_dsp wont even compile, much less work under > Asterisk any more) probably because they know it will never be > included into the Asterisk code.Someone please tell me this isn't truth. -- Tomislav Parcina ime.prezime@email.t-com.hr
We have considered working on this. T38 is a short term solution, though. Justin Newman ------------------------------ From: Tomislav Par?ina <tparcina@lama.hr> Subject: [asterisk-users] Re: Asterisk Faxing Support In article <23fd749a0702050057l24216509yb87879ba8c48f676@mail.gmail.com>, joakimsen@gmail.com says...> Asterisk 1.2 has no support of t.38 whatsoever, the call will drop > before t.38 is ever utilised, not even pass-thru. > > 1.4 Adds support for T.38 pass through only and no other sort of > faxing, the endpoint must support T.38 and you must send your call to > a T.38 gateway and you must not use NAT anywhere in your network and > you must enable re-invites which could cause CDRs not to reflect the > true details of the call. > > Asterisk/Digium also has no interest in any further interest in > expanding T.38 or faxing support in Asterisk. > > Steve Underwood and the other fine persons that have helped to develop > the software DSPs and other stuff required for FoIP support also have > no interest in writing any further faxing support for Asterisk (RxFax, > TxFax + the newest span_dsp wont even compile, much less work under > Asterisk any more) probably because they know it will never be > included into the Asterisk code.Someone please tell me this isn't truth. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a PS3 game guru. Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games. http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121
Andrew Joakimsen wrote:> 1.4 Adds support for T.38 pass through only and no other sort of > faxing, the endpoint must support T.38 and you must send your call to > a T.38 gateway and you must not use NAT anywhere in your network and > you must enable re-invites which could cause CDRs not to reflect the > true details of the call.This is not true; reinvite has zero effect on CDRs, as has been frequently discussed and documented on this and other places.> Asterisk/Digium also has no interest in any further interest in > expanding T.38 or faxing support in Asterisk.'Asterisk' is a software product, not a person or a group of people. In any case, your statement is false. Digium is quite interested in pursuing more FAX (both TDM and T.38) support in Asterisk, and we are exploring options all the time.> Steve Underwood and the other fine persons that have helped to develop > the software DSPs and other stuff required for FoIP support also have > no interest in writing any further faxing support for Asterisk (RxFax, > TxFax + the newest span_dsp wont even compile, much less work under > Asterisk any more) probably because they know it will never be > included into the Asterisk code.It has not been offered for inclusion into the Asterisk code base; it would be willingly accepted if it was offered for inclusion.
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:>Andrew Joakimsen wrote: > > >>Steve Underwood and the other fine persons that have helped to develop >>the software DSPs and other stuff required for FoIP support also have >>no interest in writing any further faxing support for Asterisk (RxFax, >>TxFax + the newest span_dsp wont even compile, much less work under >>Asterisk any more) probably because they know it will never be >>included into the Asterisk code. >> >> > >It has not been offered for inclusion into the Asterisk code base; it >would be willingly accepted if it was offered for inclusion. >The code in question is GPL. Asterisk is GPL. So as far as the desired contribution is concerned, there is nothing there that prohibits it from inclusion. The problem, however, as we all know, is that the Asterisk maintainer, Digium, requires undue retribution in the form of "disclaimers" before it will accept any contribution into the code repository - and in this case the author of the desired contribution is reasonably refusing. And that, I believe, condenses a vast portion of the frustration that the Mr. Joakimsen was expressing. Lee.