similar to: quantumvoice

The configuration I'm building replaces an existing PBX with Asterisk. There are 8 existing modems that people use to call in from the outside to connect to PC(s) on the inside to transfer data, etc. Callers access these modems by calling the main number and then dialing an extension for the modem they want to talk to. What are my options for supporting these modems with Asterisk? Here are

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69827 Priority: medium Bug ID: 69827 Assignee: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org Summary: Uneven, jerky mouse movement, increasing CPU usage QA Contact: xorg-team at lists.x.org Severity: normal Classification: Unclassified OS: Linux (All) Reporter: jimoe at

I have a Sipura SPA2000 2 line SIP FXS box with line 1 on port 5060 and line 2 on 5061. The SPA2000 is on IP address 192.168.17.6, and the asterisk box is on 102.168.17.2. Both SPA2000 ports(5060 and 5061) share the same IP address. Every minute I repeatedly get the following output: SIP Debugging Enabled 10 headers, 0 lines Reliably Transmitting: OPTIONS sip:192.168.17.6 SIP/2.0 Via:

For some reason, I can't get call pickup to work between Sip phones or between Sip and Zap phones. All phones are in the same call group and pickup group (1). The source code was downloaded and built as of today 11/15/03. Here's what's in sip.conf: [general] port=5060 bindaddr=192.168.17.2 tos=lowdelay disallow=all allow=ulaw context=aliens ; ; SIP Entry for sipura line 1 ; This

Hello team! My relative newbie status to linux is preceded only by my Samba newbie status. To make a long story short.......The powers to be at work decided it was time to purchase a genuine server, they had enough peer-to-peer networking, and money was a concern and the budget was low. So I opted for a Dell Poweredge 2300 with RH Linux 6.0 pre-installed since I had already been using linux at

"Does that help?" No. I am not your private consultant. You need to reply to the list, which I have cc'ed here, not just me. I am still somewhat confused by your specifications, but others may not be. Part of my confusion stems from your failure to provide a reproducible example (see e.g. the posting guide linked below). For example, I cannot tell from your text whether the Abc

I've been losing patience with my current provider, a small company called Sellvoip. Their termination is good, and they are asterisk based, but they are understaffed and have no concept of customer service. So I'm shopping. I am interested in the opinions of others on the providers they work with. Here are my criteria, roughly in order a) Decent quality, low latency. In

Dave, The way I see it there should be just one pass that implements deleting UB (maybe it would come to be called UBCE), and that one pass should have a command line option simply for the reason than all passes should have one. Peter Lawrence. > On Jul 26, 2017, at 10:02 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 9:23 PM

Mehdi, Hal’s transformation only kicks in in the *presence* of UB, and it does not matter how that UB got there, whether by function inlining or without function inlining. The problem with Hal’s argument is that the compiler does not have a built in ouija board with which it can conjure up the spirit of the author of the source code and find out if the UB was intentional with the

Dave, Dead code elimination is generally done in a pass called dead code elimination, Can you give concrete examples why the same would not be true for UB code elimination ? Yes, speculatively hoisting code requires it to be UB-free, but that has nothing to do with UBCE deleting entire blocks of code because of the existence of UB. The former requires an analysis proving UB-absense, the

> On Jul 21, 2017, at 10:55 PM, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2017-07-21 22:44 GMT-07:00 Peter Lawrence <peterl95124 at sbcglobal.net <mailto:peterl95124 at sbcglobal.net>>: > Mehdi, > Hal’s transformation only kicks in in the *presence* of UB > > No, sorry I entirely disagree with this assertion: I believe we

David, -fsanitize=undefined sounds great, but is not quite what I want. I recently ran into a problem with "CodeGen/MachineSink.cpp” [*], for a target that has to expand Select into control flow. The original IR had two select in a row that were based on the same condition, so the CMP that sets the FLAGS reg in the second select was MCSE’ed to the earlier CMP in the first

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1080 Bug ID: 1080 Summary: call ^^18557^O92^847^^@@ Epson printer customer care phone number Product: bugzilla Version: other Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: netfilter

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2596 Bug ID: 2596 Summary: Brother printer (((1~855~709~2847))) Technical Support Phone Number Brother Printer Customer Care Phone Number Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 4.0p1 Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2597 Bug ID: 2597 Summary: Epson printer (((1~855~709~2847))) Technical Support Phone Number Epson Printer Customer Care Phone Number Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 4.0p1 Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW

> > Having read all of these threads, I am thoroughly convinced by the positions put forward by others. > Chandler, others have decided to let the compiler continue mis-compiling the function-inlining example, others have decided to not fix the inability to hoist a loop invariant divide out of a loop. It sounds like you haven’t even thought about these things let alone

r-help Forum I'm using the dplyr:: summarize_all(funs(sum)) function and am receiving a warning message that the `funs()` is deprecated as of dplyr 0.8.0. Ok what should I be using to summarize all columns by sum? Jeff [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

ENUM lookups at e164.org return a IP route for ALL toll-free numbers. I was surprised to observe that ALL toll-free numbers get a hit at e164.org. It appears that ALL toll-free prefixes have been delegated, thereby publishing an IP route for YOUR TOLL-FREE NUMBERS, my toll-free numbers, and even toll-free numbers that have not been allocated. :-) See below Should I care? Even though this

All, Here's a cool one.. I was attempting to call a retarded conferencing service, and was having problems with it picking up my DTMF.. after trying all the settings my Sipura SPA2000 offers, I found inband actually works.. unfortunately, I can't get anything else to pick up my inband DTMF (including asterisk's builtin voicemail! It just times out and says I never entered a login!).

Hello, I don't have much experience but I'm looking for a way to contribute to Nouveau. I'd be glad to work on documentation, edit IRC logs, make cosmetic changes to code, etc. Just let me know if you have any work of this sort and I'll give it a shot. Thanks, Adam Cozzette