similar to: Incoming call from SIP proxy to asterisk

Hi, I have a SIP client which is registered to asterisk. Asterisk is registered to a SIP trunk and also handles the media. Now since my client has some issues in its RTP Tx, which seems to have some amount of jitter (mean jitter as per ethereal trace is about 17ms, max jitter is 20 ms and max delta is 85 ms), to over come that I have enabled jitter buffer in the SIP channel by setting sip.conf

Hi All, PLEASE READ if you depend on Asterisk CDR's and support transfers. Apologies for the shout but I'm desperate to get others to agree Asterisk has a big problem with the CDR's that are generated for transfers. I can understand why not too many people are interested as transfers are complicated and messy. However for those of us having to support transfers and depending on

Can any explain the following error: Error in if ((seedCount <= seedNumber) && (valueDiff > sup)) { : missing value where TRUE/FALSE needed which I get upon running this script: seedNumber <- 10 seeds <- array(dim = seedNumber) seedCount <- 1 maxValue <- 100 sup <- maxValue / 2 fcsPar <- array(as.integer(rnorm(100, 50, 10))) while (seedCount <=

Can any explain the following error: Error in if ((seedCount <= seedNumber) && (valueDiff > sup)) { : missing value where TRUE/FALSE needed which I get upon running this script: seedNumber <- 10 seeds <- array(dim = seedNumber) seedCount <- 1 maxValue <- 100 sup <- maxValue / 2 fcsPar <- array(as.integer(rnorm(100, 50, 10))) while (seedCount <=

I was wondering under what conditions Asterisk will hand off a call to another switch. I'm trying to verify that my local PSTN's Coppercom switch operates correctly... and wanted to know how to get a call REFER'd to another end-point. Thanks, -Philip

A call comes in from the PSTN, Asterisk answers it, it goes to the directory, and then to the extension the caller designates and the user at that extension answers. The user at the extension then wants to transfer the call to another extension; on the Cisco 7940 they push the ?more? soft key, then the ?Transfer? soft key, then enter the extension number they want to transfer to, and hit the

Hi List, I have a scenario that I want to try out (we potential have a client who would need this), but I am as of yet unable to find much help with it. What we want to do is have an asterisk box with a large number of extensions (1000+). This asterisk box will have approximately 3 SIP trunks setup back to providers. What we want to do is to be able to define groups of extensions that use

Hi Mayur, > On 24 Nov 2014, at 07:00, MAYUR PANDEY <mayur.p at samsung.com> wrote: > In the assembly generated with O0, we are getting the "blx" instruction whereas with O1 we get "bx" (in 3.4.2 we used to get "blx" for both O0 and O1). > > Is this because of this patch: [llvm] r214959 - ARM: do not generate BLX instructions on Cortex-M CPUs

Hi all, Are there any scale limitations in terms of how many nodes can be in a single Gluster Cluster or how much storage capacity can be managed in a single cluster? What are some of the large deployments out there that you know of? Thanks, Mayur ***************************Legal Disclaimer*************************** "This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for

Hi, This is regarding a TODO mentioned in getIdentityValue function in InstructionCombining.cpp file. //TODO: We can handle other cases e.g. Instruction::And, Instruction::Or etc. I wanted to know what could be the use cases of implementing these. When I tried implementing these and wrote test cases for the same, the test cases would be optimized in InstructionSimplify before hitting the code

Actually it should have not thrown error at all. it works fine with gcc. And the part of code which you mentioned is not getting hit at all. Maybe some difference in parsing is there. On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com>wrote: > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Mayur Pandey <mayurthebond at gmail.com>wrote: > >> for the following

Hi Steve, > .. I'll try to sort all this out, and then I'll attack this > problem. Hopefully, I get it all into svn before the next release of > 1.4...! Just wondering if any new CDR functionality made it into the 1.4.16.2 release? I have looked through the ChangeLog for the 1.4.15 and 1.4.16.2 releases but didn't spot anything to do with changes in CDR handling. I for one

For the given test: class A1 { int x; int y; public: A1(int a, int b) { x=a; y=b; } A1 operator+(const A1&); }; A1 A1::operator+(const A1& second) { A1 sum(0,0); sum.x = x + second.x; sum.y = y + second.y; return (sum); } int main (void) { A1 one(2,3); A1 two(4,5); return 0; } when the exectable of this code is debugged in gdb for i386, we dont get the

I'm not really an overload resolution expert, so I could be wrong. Anyway, please file a bug report (http://llvm.org/bugs/), and our overload resolution experts will take a look. :) -Eli On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Mayur Pandey <mayurthebond at gmail.com>wrote: > Actually it should have not thrown error at all. it works fine with gcc. > And the part of code which you

On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 at 03:32, Mayur Dewaikar <mdewaikar at commvault.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > Are there any scale limitations in terms of how many nodes can be in a > single Gluster Cluster or how much storage capacity can be managed in a > single cluster? What are some of the large deployments out there that you > know of? > > The current design of GlusterD is not

Hi, Structures are passed by pointer, so the return value is not actually in eax. That code gets transformed into something like: void sum(A1 *out, const A1 one, const A1 two) { out->x = one.x + two.x out->y = one.y + two.y } So actually the function ends up returning void and operating on a hidden parameter, so %eax is dead at the end of the function and should not be being relied

Hey there. I've been working on a project to integrate Asterisk with Exchange Unified Messaging via sipX using large parts borrowed from: http://blog.lithiumblue.com/2007/04/accessing-exchange-2007-unified_29.html ... and everything works surprisingly well. The one problem I have is MWI, or a lack thereof. Exchange 2007 doesn't support MWI of any kind (!), so I've been looking into

Problem seems not only with operator overloading, It occurs with struct value returning also. gdb while debugging expects the return value in eax, gcc does returns in eax, But Clang returns in edx(it can be checked in gdb by printing the contents of edx). Code(sample code) struct A1 { int x; int y; }; A1 sum(const A1 one, const A1 two) { A1 plus = {0,0}; plus.x = one.x + two.x; plus.y

for the following code: struct X { X(); }; struct Y { operator X() const; }; X a = { Y() }; // reports error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'X' X aa = Y(); // works fine clang when compiled with std=c++11 gives compilation errors as: testfile.C:11:3: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'X' X a = { Y() }; // reports error: no

Hi, I am using asterisk 1.4.17 which is connected to a SIP trunk supporting rfc2833 dtmf events. Asterisk stays in the media path. In sip.conf I have set dtmfmode=rfc2833 for the outbound sip proxy (SIP Trunk account) and for SIP clients I have set dtmfmode=info. So when I make a call to a cell number using the sip trunk and then press digits I can see the 2833 dtmf events coming to asterisk