John,<br><br>Just curious - why are you using zaptel at all? Does it provide something for you that the wanpipe drivers do not? I use Sangoma only with Sangoma cards and I have a lot of success.<br><br>-MC<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:19 PM, John Wehle <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:john@feith.com">john@feith.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
> Okay, a few things. First off, the wanpipe2.conf file has a booboo.<br>
<br>
Don't think so.<br>
<br>
> This line is WRONG:<br>
> TDMV_DCHAN = 0<br>
<br>
Not exactly. My understanding is you can use either:<br>
<br>
wanpipeX.conf: TDMV_DCHAN = 0<br>
zaptel.conf: dchan = 24 (or in our case 48 since it's the second span)<br>
<br>
which means use zaptel to handle the d-channel hdlc or<br>
<br>
wanpipeX.conf: TDMV_DCHAN = 24<br>
zaptel.conf: hardhdlc = 24 (or in our case 48 since it's the second span)<br>
<br>
which means use wanpipe to handle the d-channel hdlc assuming the<br>
wanpipe driver has the necessary support (wanpipe on my platform<br>
doesn't).<br>
<br>
> Also, I recommend changing this line:<br>
> wbg1 = wanpipe2, , TDM_VOICE, Comment<br>
><br>
> To this:<br>
> wbg1 = wanpipe2, , TDM_VOICE_API, Comment<br>
<br>
The sangoma voice API interface isn't available on my platform<br>
and shouldn't be necessary when using zaptel.<br>
<br>
> assuming that this is what you want then you will need to use<br>
> ozmod_libpri because the default OpenZAP PRI stack does not<br>
> currently support being the network side.<br>
<br>
Are you sure? Openzap appears to contain implementations for<br>
both NT and TE. The configuration file supports specifying<br>
either user or network for the mode. Is the NT support<br>
currently nonfunctional?<br>
<br>
I had tried configuring the Cisco as the NT with similar<br>
results.<br>
<br>
> I don't see where timing is specified<br>
<br>
It's the same T1 which was being used for RBS between<br>
FreeSWITCH and the Cisco so that timing (etc) should<br>
be okay. No errors are showing up at the physical<br>
level and the Cisco reports Layer 1 as active.<br>
<br>
The trace on the Cisco seems to show Layer 2 coming up<br>
(timestamps 22:53:44.264 through 22:54:21.760), then<br>
there's a long pause during which no Receive Ready<br>
frames are received from FreeSWITCH. At this point<br>
the Cisco gets unhappy and marks Layer 2 as down.<br>
<br>
If nothing obvious comes to anyone's mind, then I'll<br>
simply need to trace through the FreeSWITCH ISDN code<br>
and see what's going on.<br>
<br>
-- John<br>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
| Feith Systems | Voice: 1-215-646-8000 | Email: <a href="mailto:john@feith.com">john@feith.com</a> |<br>
| John Wehle | Fax: 1-215-540-5495 | |<br>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Freeswitch-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org">Freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users" target="_blank">http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users</a><br>
UNSUBSCRIBE:<a href="http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users" target="_blank">http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users</a><br>
<a href="http://www.freeswitch.org" target="_blank">http://www.freeswitch.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>