similar to: Fax passthrough howto codec upspeed

I just had the same exact problem this morning. The only thing I've done in the last couple of days is update update zaptel. I rolled back my zaptel to 2/11/04 from 3/8/04. And kept my libpri from 3/8/04. I never had this error before updated. I had other issues, but not this one. -sb -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com

Hi, We have a Ericsson BP250 Phone system setup witht he following configuration Telco <-> Asterisk E405P <-> BP250 The system seem to work perfectly on 1.0.9 for a very long time but there is some functionality we wanted to take advantage of in the 1.2 version branch so we upgraded. Currently running Asterisk 1.2.4 Zaptel 1.2.3 (noticed 1.2.4 is out will upgrade next

I've this error How i can find the problem? Apr 23 12:24:43 WARNING[131081]: PRI: received TEI check request for TEI = 89 Apr 23 12:24:47 WARNING[131081]: PRI: received TEI check request for TEI = 89 Apr 23 12:24:48 WARNING[131081]: PRI: !! Got a UA, but i'm in state 1 Apr 23 12:24:53 WARNING[131081]: PRI: received TEI check request for TEI = 89 Apr 23 12:25:02 WARNING[131081]: PRI:

Hi all- HELP! This is actually a revisit of a problem that I had earlier with E400P's at a customer site. Customer still gets locked up channel problem, but has learned to live with it (channels clear themselves after several minutes). The symptoms, which I believe are directly related: I'm having problems with tons of framing and "read" errors on my E1 connections (and

I managed to get Asterisk working with my PBX using T1, now I am moving on to trying to make PRI work. I have my zaptel.conf and zapata.conf configured as follows: Zaptel.conf: span=1,1,0,esf,b8zs bchan=1-23 dchan=24 loadzone=us defaultzone=us Zapata.conf: [channels] transfer=yes immediate=yes callprogress=yes language=en context=default switchtype=national signalling=pri_net group=1

Hi! I have the chance to play with a couple of E400P cards, each installed in a IBM e330 XSeries servers (2 x 1GHz P-III CPU 2 Gb RAM, 36Gb SCSI HDD with RH8.0 2.4.18-smp kernel), and I'm trying to test/benchmark this e330/E400P combo generating calls thru /var/spool/asterisk/outgoing One e400P if doing the carrier work making calls and the other just receives the calls: Server#1

I've got a 4 port T1 card in my Asterisk box with a PRI from Qwest as my PSTN interface. I'm experiencing random dropped calls on the various SIP devices I have tested. Network connectivity to the SIP devices looks ok, and I have tried a variety of the devices including all of the following. Grandstream 286 Grandstresm 486 Sipura SPA 1000 Mediatrix 2102 Some example lines from my logs

Hi, Urgently response would be wonderful, system is a Fedora Core 2. I have a Ericsson BP250 connected to 1 port on the TE405P and another connected to a local telco ISDN30. I have been running CVS-HEAD from about a 2 months ago and upgraded it again just in cause it was a version issue (didn't fix it) but this is what I am getting. When a person calls out from an extension on the BP250 to

Dear List i have upgrade my * box with the latest CVS version of Asterisk Stable 1.0 and zaptel/libpri my system is MDK9.2 with 1 TE410P and seems work well for now but i have a little amount of traffic (25 IN/OUT calls) i only notice this Warning.. What kind of error is? ------------------------------- Apr 20 21:28:49 WARNING[147466]: chan_zap.c:5979 zt_pri_error: PRI: !! Got reject for

Hi all, Sorry to bother you with the potentially not too bright question, but since I cannot get it to work, I'll have to ask someone.. I've got this vector: > token [1] sal skal skal bak b_r d_ gal kal l_r n_r pak p_r [13] sal sl_r sn_r spak sp_r st_r s_ bak d_ gal l_r pak [25] p_r sak sl_r sp_r t_ kal n_r s_ st_r sak kal

> -----Original Message----- > From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users- > bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Eric "ManxPower" Wieling > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 4:30 PM > To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion > Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Hardware TDM Switching > > asterisk@nicox.org wrote: >

Configuration: Linux wpbx 2.4.9-13 #1 Tue Oct 30 20:11:04 EST 2001 i686 unknown P4 2.5 GHz, 1 GB RAM T400P with 3 T1s plugged in. A flow of 46 calls (spread out over 3 T1s). Each call gets transferred (Dial) to the SIP platform and stays for 5 min. Case 1. Asterisk built out of CVS Mar. 19. Test was running for 3 days. Segmentation fault. Case 2. Asterisk built out of CVS Apr. 1. Test was running

I just tried to go from CAS to PRI on my T1 (Sangoma), and failed pretty badly. Seemingly everything worked -- Asterisk would see the incoming call (including CID and DID info), try to route it, and fail -- giving me a telco (not Asterisk) call failure message. My zapata.conf and zaptel.conf files are at http://pastebin.com/558349 Below's the log dump. Note that, because I was simply going

Hello all, I got a problem at an asterisk server, with dropping calls, losing all channels and reaktivating all channels and beeing back up. This problem seems to occure randomly over the whole day, when it gots traffic on the card. After looking @ google I found several hints but none did work fine. To avoid problems with the phone line (german E1) I called the provider, he did a 45 min. route

Hi all, I apologies in advance if I am missing something very simple here, but since I failed at resolving this myself, I'm sending this question to the list. I would appreciate any help in understanding how the rpart function is (exactly) computing the "improve" (which is given in fit$split), and how it differs when using the split='information' vs split='gini'

I've noticed that the max.col function with the default "random" option often gives unexpected results. For instance, in this test, it seems clear what the answer should be: > # second col should always be max > x1 = cbind(1:10, 2:11, -Inf) > > # this works fine > max.col(x1, "first") [1] 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 > > # this gives random answers >

Dear list, While trying to identify the root of a problem I am having with garbage collected variables, I have come across the following oddity: depending on whether --verbose is set or not, I obtain different results. I have made a small standalone example to demonstrate it. The example is very artificial, but I had a hard time reproducing reliably the problem. So when I do: (the content of

I've architected this in a way that looks future proof at least to the openssl provider transition. What will happen in openssl 3.0.0 is that providers become active and will accept keys via URI. The current file mechanisms will still be available but internally it will become a file URI. To support the provider interface, openssl will have to accept keys by URI instead of file and may

Estimado, te agradeceria me envies el tutorial en espaniol para R. Estoy dando mis primeros pasos con esta aplicacion. Desde ya muchas gracias Danilo Ceschin Ph.D IGBMC 1 rue Laurent Fries 67404 ILLKIRCH CEDEX - FRANCE tel 33 3 88 65 3457 email danilo at titus.u-strasbg.fr

[This email is either empty or too large to be displayed at this time]