[Freeswitch-users] Possible typo on Openzap.conf wiki page specifying fxs/fxo-channels

[François Legal]

Well, I am the guy who made the modification in the wiki.

I use sangoma card and the openzap file is generated by the Setup script
from sangoma driver.
It seems that the terminology used by zaptel is not used in wanpipe
configuration.

I have an A400 card with an FXO module (providing ports 11 and 12) and an
FXS module (providing ports 9 and 10)

My openzap.conf is like this :

[span wanpipe FXS]
name => Analog phone 1
number => 9000
fxs-channel => 1:9
name => Analog phone 2
number => 9001
fxs-channel => 1:10

[span wanpipe FXO]
name => POTS line 1
number => 1234567890
fxo-channel => 1:11
name => POTS line 2
number => 0987654321
fxo-channel => 1:12

About the name and number, this is what I get here by observation :
If I make a call from channel 1:9 and the diaplan do not modify the CID
variables, the called person see "Analog Phone 1" as CID name and 9000 as
CID number.
On the other hand, if I receive a call on channel 1:11, the "channel_name"
variable raised in the diaplan would be openzap/2/1/1234567890 (I guess
here that if number is not specified, I would get openzap/2/1). Moreover
(still this is by observation) if the carrier does not send CID (to be
precise, I mean no modulation is received) the CID name and number raised
in diaplan on incoming calls are set to name and number from openzap.conf

I hope this is clear enought

François

On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:24:31 +1100, Brian May
<brian at microcomaustralia.com.au> wrote:
> On 24 February 2010 04:48, Robert Hadley <robert.hadley at teotech.com>
wrote:
>> On the http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/Openzap.conf_Examples wiki page,
>> is
>> there a typo in the wanpipe /usr/local/freeswitch/conf/openzap.conf
>> example
>> concerning specifying the fxo-channel vs. fxs-channel?
> 
> I agree. The first example looks correct to me; the 2nd example looks
> wrong.
> 
> See the table I created to try and explain what term to use where:
> 
> http://wiki.freeswitch.org/wiki/OpenZAP#FXO.2FFXS_Terminology
> 
> In the examples you quoted, ports 1 and 2 are extension ports, so are
> FXS ports, but should be defined as FXO ports in openzap.conf.
> 
> Ports 3 and 4 are telephone line ports, so are FXO ports, but should
> be defined as FXS ports in openzap.conf.
> 
> I have only used zaptel myself, however I suspect the same applies to
> wanpipe.