similar to: Grandstream ATA 486 works only with ulaw and alaw codecs.

Hi, When ever I put g729 in allow for trunk the other two codecs (ulaw and alaw) stop working and I get the frame type error for them, but g729 works fine. I've cleared general part of sip.conf of codec info to be on safe side. If ulaw and alaw are the only ones allowed they work fine. Asterisk shouldn't be doing any encoding or decoding, all codecs should be passing through. Any

In Asterisk 1.6, there is an option to use the 'new g.711 algorithm'. "Use the NEW ulaw/alaw codec's (slower, but cleaner)" By slower does this mean more 'expensive', or does it instead mean that there will be more algorithmic latency? Both? Can anyone speak to the relative increases? With regard to accuracy, can anyone speak to what kind of situation might

> From: "John Hughes" <john at calva.com> > To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List, Non-Commercial Discussion" > <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com> > Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 2:10:45 AM > Subject: [asterisk-users] I can do alaw, ulaw and gsm; remote can do g729 and > alaw; asterisk wants to translate g729 -> alaw. WHY? > I am having a

On 14/05/2020 08:10, John Hughes wrote: > > I am having a problem with one of my callers who is using either g729 > or alaw.  I can do alaw but not g729 so asterisk should negotiate alaw > right?  In fact from the sip debug it looks like it does, but then I > get the dreaded "channel.c:5630 set_format: Unable to find a codec > translation path: (g729) -> (alaw)"

Hello! Client is using ulaw, however server sometimes fills the log with following: [2011-03-09 21:23:07] WARNING[27204] chan_sip.c: Asked to transmit frame type slin, while native formats is 0x8 (alaw) read/write = 0x4 (ulaw)/0x8 (alaw) [2011-03-09 21:23:07] WARNING[27204] chan_sip.c: Asked to transmit frame type slin, while native formats is 0x8 (alaw) read/write = 0x4 (ulaw)/0x8 (alaw)

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 11:31 AM John Hughes <john at calva.com> wrote: > On 14/05/2020 08:10, John Hughes wrote: > > I am having a problem with one of my callers who is using either g729 or > alaw. I can do alaw but not g729 so asterisk should negotiate alaw right? > In fact from the sip debug it looks like it does, but then I get the > dreaded "channel.c:5630

Should I expect a standard fax machine connected to an ata-188 connected to an asterisk server, connected to a pri fed from a cisco 7206vxr to work correctly? It needs to have a standard fax machine, receiving and emailing it won't be acceptable. Thanks dave -- Dave Weis "I believe there are more instances of the abridgment djweis@sjdjweis.com of the freedom of the

Greetings, I'm running latest * from CVS on FreeBSD 4.10 box. We've just bought several WellGate 3502A FXSes to play with till welltech guys fix the 3504a's registration bug. So far everything is working as expected, except the fact only ulaw and alaw codecs work with *. If I add allow=gsm or allow=g723.1 in FXS's ports entries in the sip.conf, no voice is heard from both

Hi there I europe alaw is usual. I have a SIP Phone which perferes ulaw. When my * box has to transcode alaw to ulaw the sound get's one way choppy. (alaw => ulaw is choppy, ulaw => alaw is fine). I managed to fix the issue by forcing my SIP phone to use alaw only, but is this a know issue with asterisk 1.2.13? -Benoit-

The other end is sending g729 even though it was not negotiated. The other end should not do this and it usually seems that the other ends that do send g729. This was recently fixed. See https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-28139 Richard On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 1:11 AM John Hughes <john at calva.com> wrote: > I am having a problem with one of my callers who is using

Hi list! When I receive an incoming call from a SIP peer where I've configured disallow=all allow=alaw (and no other codec) I can see the following NOTICE on the console: Dropping incompatible voice frame SIP/peer07-0000007c of format ulaw since our native format has changed to (alaw) My question is: where can I change the native format from ulaw to alaw (or something else)? Is ulaw, as

Hi There . Iam runnig a Freebsd5.0 Access Point with a PCMCIA card PRISM 2.5 chipset 200mw , I have got 32 clients on it but is not working fine, keep crashing and I have lot wi0: timesouts on the screen. I was using with same computer other prism card but prism2 and that card work very well but with a lot lower power and more noise because I need use an Ampl. With The prism2.5 the Access

Dear all, I'm trying to use ulaw and alaw with Diax and Asterisk but I'm not able to, I got the following error message: Mar 20 11:47:59 NOTICE[7099]: chan_iax2.c:6350 socket_read: Rejected connect attempt from 192.168.0.55, requested/capability 0x8/0xc incompatible with our capability 0xfe02. I do not understand why because my Asterisk box load these codecs properly! Does somebody

Hi everybody, got it from svn: dtmf_2833_1.pcap */asterisk/trunk/tests/rfc2833_dtmf_detect/configs/extensions.conf PRE-CREATION *>* /asterisk/trunk/tests/rfc2833_dtmf_detect/configs/sip.conf PRE-CREATION *>* /asterisk/trunk/tests/rfc2833_dtmf_detect/run-test PRE-CREATION *>* /asterisk/trunk/tests/rfc2833_dtmf_detect/sipp/broken_dtmf.pcap UNKNOWN *>*

Hi All, Can someone explain to me the difference between g711's ulaw and alaw codecs? Is it just different header info or is the actual payload in each encoded differently? I have thus far noe been able to find any difinative information onthe matter. All I've managed to find out that they are "similar", they sound the same and that it doesn't matter which you use. Could

> Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 17:38:27 -0600 > From: "Henry Devito" <hdevito@qwest.net> > Subject: [Asterisk-Users] SPA-2000 > To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" > <asterisk-users@lists.digium.com> > Message-ID: <000d01c50012$4ea49f30$4300000a@homeacxa7jw2xn> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed;

I have a prism 2.5 firmaware 1.5.6 but I can't make work this in 11Mbps on Freebsd 5.1 but the same card work perfect in Freebsd 5.0 help pls! this is my ifconfig wi0:flags=8947<UP,BROADCAST,DEBUG,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 ether 00:60:b3:7a:a3:1d media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet DS/11Mbps <hostap> (DS/2Mbps <hostap>) status:

Folks, I've been following recent discussions regarding echo and echo training with much interest, since it's a problem we've never been able to eliminate here. We're facing two challenges presently, and they may be related (or not): a) Cisco 7960s in the office here echo back to our staff, but the customer hears decent sound. b) We've yet to be able to pass faxes through

I have updated the voice prompts (mostly small fixes, but still work left to be done - however, it's usable now, I'd say) and the patch file (to current CVS) for Asterisk-in-Dutch. As far as I can tell, all of the grammar work is now in - if anyone has feedback to share, please do so before I spend lots of time cleaning up the patches so they can be integrated back.

I have just completed a set of voice files in Dutch, plus a patch that forces Asterisk to sane (i.e. Dutch ;-)) behaviour when composing dates, times, numbers, etcetera. The current release, 0.0.1, is a sort of pre-release - some known issues have been identified, but I nevertheless would like to have some feedback so we can do a minimum number of polishing rounds. The patch is a bit