similar to: Branch based on call volume

?I meant how many calls are in progress on a particular trunk. (Sorry - I didn't even think of the other interpretation). ________________________________ From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com <asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com> on behalf of Matt Riddell <lists at venturevoip.com> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2015 9:26 AM To: Asterisk Users List Subject: Re:

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 12:04 PM Andrey Bokhanko via cfe-dev < cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Thanks Jason (and Chandler) to tell Chandler's opinion, though it still > doesn't answer my original question: > > > > Both SE and libomptarget are libraries that handle offloading, not > parallelism. I understand other libraries, to be added in the future, might

Any progress on the FreeBSD front? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/nouveau/attachments/20151103/53a1688d/attachment.html>

Hello, I would like to setup a mechanism to trigger an alarm if user is deal too many numbers within a very short period of time. Safeguard against users hacked accounts. can someone help? Thanks,

>At this point I'm able to link Linux kernel with LLD and objcopy doen't give me any errors. > >The versions are: > >Linux 4.10.0-rc5 (+ applied the patch from my previous message) >LLD 5.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm-mirror/lld db83a5cc3968b3aac1dbe3270190bd3282862e74) (+ applied D28612) >GNU objcopy (GNU Binutils) 2.27 > >The problem is that the resulting

On some SIP phones it is possible to turn off the missed call notifications, but I am not aware of a way to do the same on any cell phones. On 5 Jun 2015 07:29, "Mehmet Avcioglu" <mehmet at activecom.net> wrote: > > There is no signal that is sent to display a missed call. Your cell phone > does that. If it rings and is not answered it counts that as a miss. The > only

I talked to Chandler about the name "offload_libs" vs "parallel_libs" and he said he thinks "offload" is too narrow of a term for the scope he sees for this subproject. One example he brought up was AVX 512. He thinks that code explicitly targeting CPU parallelism should also be included in this project, even though it doesn't fit in the category of

2nd round of missing stuff in compiler-rt which is just waiting for review --------------- http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140210/204960.html http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140210/204961.html The code is pretty small - Can someone please review those patches and push it. This blocks quad math stuff on aarch64 from using compiler-rt

On Apr 1, 2016 5:34 PM, "George Burgess IV via cfe-dev" < cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > How are we casting our votes? Discordantly! > Will this be a standard yay-or-neigh format, or do people prefer an alternate method? > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Daniel Dilts via cfe-dev < cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> I second the

I have a trunk, and its host=dynamic dns. The problem is, when the IP changes the Sip show peers Still show the old IP of the DNS, I have to reload and save the configuration again so that asterisk recognize the new IP of the DNS. Any idea how to automate such a thing? Or how can I keep asterisk to deal with NAMES as NAMES, and IPs as IPs. Let me know. Thanks. -------------- next

------ Original Message ------ From: "Tony Kasule" <timotsmith at gmail.com> To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion" <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com> Sent: 30/06/2015 8:34:47 p.m. Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Help With Physical Layer >Hello, > >Anyone to help me with this issue? It has never worked :( Hi Tony I'm not

On 6 May 2016 at 22:57, Tanya Lattner <tanyalattner at llvm.org> wrote: > The major weapon of harassers is arguing whether something is actually > harassing. It is difficult to enforce a CoC if you have to have a month long > nasty argument about whether it was violated. It burns out people like you. The major weapon about enforcers is *not* wanting to argue. Harassment is a very

>> The loop checking is a bit more challenging than that. If Bob >> forwards to Fred and Fred forwards to Sue, all is well when Bob and >> Fred head out for a beer. A little later, we?re in deep doo-do0 when >> Sue forwards to Bob. > Could this possibly mean that any person who has CF set should never > be available as CF Destination. Simple db entry/check can

>Thank you! It worked and I finally got a working kernel. Here is the kernel boot log: Sound great ! Though I ended with error from log below. Had no chance to fix it yet: ? CPU: AMD QEMU Virtual CPU version 2.5+ (family: 0x6, model: 0x6, stepping: 0x3) Performance Events: PMU not available due to virtualization, using software events only. ..TIMER: vector=0x30 apic1=0 pin1=2 apic2=-1

<div>Thanks for the tip. Our goal is to know that call-limit is triggered. And later analyze this info, maybe do some action.</div><div>Yes, we can parse CDRs or execute AGI script but we do not want inmplement this logic on Asterisk because it can affectš<span>performance.</span></div><div>š</div><div>02.07.2015, 15:31, "jg"

I see a lot of attempts by hackers to call 00972595301123? or 011972595115207? or variations but that same 972595 is often present. Can someone break down that dial string with an explanation? The 011 look like an overseas call (from Americas), while the 972595XXXXXX is unclear... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

We've deoplyed a number of pure VoIP wireless (wifi & proprietary) phones, but not dect. Is there a simple overview of integrating DECT phones with Asterisk somewhere? I assume the DECT basestation has a multi-account SIP VoIP interface, and the handsets are just plain old dect? Can you push configuration info to individual phones? (Are they individually addressible / configurable

I happened to be in the cli tonight as some (208.122.57.58) initiated a simple attack - just trying to make long distance calls from outside context. Although harmless, this went on for several minutes as the idiot just used up my bandwidth with SIP messages. Here's and example: [2011-12-28 22:53:42] NOTICE[9635]: chan_sip.c:14035 handle_request_invite: Call from '' to extension

Is there a recent survey of that Linux distro and version people are using for the Asterisk installations? I recall seeing a pie chart over a year ago (I think on a wiki but I can't find it again)....also hoping for something more current. I suspect RH5 and RH6 are most popular...but I'm looking for facts -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: