- FreeSWITCH-users - FreeSWITCH Mailing Lists

mod_gsmopen - deadlock tty
by Luiz Fernando Softov 16 Dec '15

16 Dec '15

Hi, I'm using freeswitch 1.15 in Freebsd 10.1, with mod_gsmopen FreeSWITCH Version 1.5.15b+git~20150407T231134Z~d55c4a053b~64bit (git d55c4a0 2015-04-07 23:11:34Z 64bit), whats happen, its the same with another versions like, 1.6, 1.4.19, etc After sometime running freeswitch, i have this TTYs. crw------- 1 root wheel 0x8e Sep 24 15:30 ttyU1.3 crw------- 1 root wheel 0x8f Sep 24 15:30 ttyU1.3.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0x90 Sep 24 15:30 ttyU1.3.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0x8e Sep 24 15:30 ttyU2.3 crw------- 1 root wheel 0x8f Sep 24 15:30 ttyU2.3.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0x90 Sep 24 15:30 ttyU2.3.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0x8e Sep 24 15:30 ttyU3.3 crw------- 1 root wheel 0x8f Sep 24 15:30 ttyU3.3.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0x90 Sep 24 15:30 ttyU3.3.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0x76 Sep 25 00:46 ttyU4.0 crw------- 1 root wheel 0x77 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.0.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0x78 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.0.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0x7c Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.1 crw------- 1 root wheel 0x7d Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.1.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0x7e Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.1.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0x82 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.2 crw------- 1 root wheel 0x83 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.2.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0x84 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.2.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0x8e Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.3 crw------- 1 root wheel 0x8f Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.3.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0x90 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU4.3.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0xa8 Sep 25 00:46 ttyU5.0 crw------- 1 root wheel 0xa9 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.0.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0xaa Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.0.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0xae Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.1 crw------- 1 root wheel 0xaf Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.1.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0xb6 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.1.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0xba Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.2 crw------- 1 root wheel 0xbb Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.2.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0xbc Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.2.lock crw------- 1 root wheel 0xc0 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.3 crw------- 1 root wheel 0xc1 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.3.init crw------- 1 root wheel 0xc2 Sep 24 22:28 ttyU5.3.lock As you can see, ttyU1.3, ttyU2.3, ttyU3.3 are USB deadlocks I try to unload mod_gsmopen, but i receive a message that is in use so i kill freeswitch, then ttyU1.3, ttyU2.3, ttyU3.3, are free and disappear (as well .init and .lock) I try to figure out whats happening, with logs, alarms, but i can't. Someone have the same problem, or know the solution? ps. Reading the list, i realize that few members use the module, or don't have problems. If i am correct, is there any other way to use GSM modems or GSM, which is low cost? Is there anyone who can guide me in some things about the code or tips? ps 2. sorry about my english -- Luiz Fernando Softov http://www.softov.com.br fernando(a)softov.com.br

3 19

! [rejected] master -> master (non-fast-forward) how to udate my changes
by Shabbir abbasi 16 Dec '15

16 Dec '15

i am working on some feature and unable to push error is

1 1

Re: [Freeswitch-users] Freeswitch over docker
by Lyle Pratt 15 Dec '15

15 Dec '15

YES! We maintain a Freeswitch Docker container and use it in production. We include all modules and make it super configurable. Relevant links: https://github.com/BetterVoice/freeswitch-container https://hub.docker.com/r/bettervoice/freeswitch-container/ Let us know if you have questions. Regards, Lyle Pratt

2 1

Re: [Freeswitch-users] How to break endless_play?
by 张顺通 15 Dec '15

15 Dec '15

The reason is endless_play can't be break. I think that need to be break. 2015-12-14 12:16 GMT+08:00 张顺通 <shuntongzhang(a)gmail.com>: > I use event socket endless_play file on an uuid. > But endless_play seem to be could not be break by break cmd. > when I call cmd in this order : endless_play - break - endless_play - > break - endless_play - break - endless_play - break - .....（80 times will > core） > > FS stack will grow, and will core。 > [image: 内嵌图片 1] >

2 1

fax issue
by huseyin kalyoncu 15 Dec '15

15 Dec '15

hello i tried sending fax from freeswitch dialplan with the following xml part but i failed. I called 1079 but no fax transmitted. What am i doing wrong? <extension name="fax_receive"> <condition field="destination_number" expression="^1077$"> <action application="answer" /> <action application="playback" data="silence_stream://2000"/> <action application="rxfax" data="$${temp_dir}/rxfax.tif"/> <action application="hangup"/> </condition> </extension> <extension name="fax_transmit"> <condition field="destination_number" expression="^1078$"> <action application="txfax" data="$${temp_dir}/txfax-sample.tiff"/> <action application="hangup"/> </condition> </extension> <extension name="test_txfax_stream"> <condition field="destination_number" expression="^1079$"> <action application="set" data="ignore_early_media=true"/> <action application="set" data="fax_enable_t38=true"/> <action application="set" data="fax_verbose=true"/> <action application="set" data="hangup_after_bridge_true"/> <action application="export" data="execute_on_fax_detect=execute_extension 1078"/> <action application="bridge" data="loopback/1077"/> </condition> </extension> thanks Huseyin

1 2

Re- FreeSWITCH call billing timers vs. BT SIP billing
by Andrew Keil 15 Dec '15

15 Dec '15

To FreeSWITCH users, I have a question in regard to correct billing of a SIP call within FreeSWITCH (to align with Telco billing), since I have asked this question below of BT (direct to their SIP compliance testing team) and received their response today. Based on the diagram below of a simple SIP call: BT FreeSWITCH | --- INVITE ------> | | <-- 100 Trying --- | | <-- 200 OK ------- | | --- ACK ---------> | | <-- RTP ---------> | | --- BYE ---------> | | <-- 200 OK ------- | In order to best match the BT billing records for call duration (that will be sent to my client for their SIP service) I want to make sure that our timers are correct. In the above diagram shows an inbound call from BT to FreeSWITCH. Which of the below statements are correct (2 out of the 4 should be correct): 1) The answer (or connect) timer should start from when FreeSWITCH sends the "200 OK" to indicate that the call is connected? 2) The answer (or connect) timer should start from when FreeSWITCH receives the ACK message back from BT (after sending the "200 OK" to indicate that the call was connected)? 3) The timer for call duration should end when FreeSWITCH receives the "BYE" message from BT? 4) The timer for call duration should end when FreeSWITCH sends the "200 OK" to BT (after it received the "BYE" message from BT)? If the call was reversed ie. an outbound call made from FreeSWITCH to BT (simply swap BT and FreeSWITCH in the above diagram) Which of the below statements are correct (2 out of the 4 should be correct): 1) The answer (or connect) timer should start from when FreeSWITCH receives the "200 OK" to indicate that the call is connected? 2) The answer (or connect) timer should start from when FreeSWITCH sends the ACK message back to BT (after receiving the "200 OK" to indicate that the call was connected)? 3) The timer for call duration should end when FreeSWITCH sends the "BYE" message to BT? 4) The timer for call duration should end when FreeSWITCH receives the "200 OK" from BT (after it sent the "BYE" message to BT)? BT's response: ... Out of the first 4 statements, numbers 2 and 3 are closest. After BT sends the ACK the call timer will start, it will then stop again when BT sends the BYE. Out of the second 4 statements, numbers 2 and 3 are closest. After BT receives the ACK the call timer will start, it will then stop again after BT receives the BYE. ... Therefore, when looking at FreeSWITCH this becomes more interesting, if I base BT's response to be true and correct. Since currently the events generated at the end of a call CHANNEL_HANGUP and CHANNEL_HANGUP_COMPLETE, which align as follows: CHANNEL_HANGUP when BYE received or sent CHANNEL_HANGUP_COMPLETE when 200 OK sent or received Which brings me to my actual question: Since billing timing is done from the point of call connect (or when the ACK is received or sent after the 200 OK) to the point of receiving the BYE message (or sending it, depending on the direction of the call) then why does FreeSWITCH return all the billing variables inside the CHANNEL_HANGUP_COMPLETE based on call timer ending when CHANNEL_HANGUP_COMPLETE is generated and not based on when CHANNEL_HANGUP is generated? Here is a snipet of the CHANNEL_HANGUP_COMPLETE variables: variable_duration:14 variable_billsec:14 ... variable_billmsec:14041 ... variable_billusec:14041103 ... variable_answerusec:58543 In order to test this, I delayed a Lua script after HUNGUP (or CHANNEL_HANGUP event) was detected (for about 10 seconds) prior to ending the Lua script. I know this is not recommended, however it is just to explain this case. As you can see the call duration and all the billing variables show the time up to CHANNEL_HANGUP_COMPLETE not CHANNEL_HANGUP. However, the interesting variable is: variable_answerusec, which seems correct up to CHANNEL_HANGUP. I would appreciate any comments regarding this since obviously I would like the call durations on FreeSWITCH to match BT. If BT are not correct with their timer points, then I am happy to go back to them with some evidence to dispute their claims. Regards, Andrew Keil

3 4

monitoring sip endpoint
by Babak Yakhchali 15 Dec '15

15 Dec '15

Hi Is it possible to monitor a remote sip endpoint at sip level ? for example send a sip packet and get a reply to know if the endpoint is ready to accept calls? thanks

2 1

The public perception of open-source software
by Ken Rice 15 Dec '15

15 Dec '15

New Post on freeswitch.org from Kathleen King check it out at http://ift.tt/1OsGMcz The public perception of open-source software These days “free” software seems to be a scary prospect to the general public. The association between open-source software and malicious “click here for free stuff” ads is strong and the fear of unknown “hackers” runs rampant. The old adage that “nothing good in life comes for free” has ingrained the idea that free is synonymous with scams. Why would anyone in their right mind give away a great product for free? This thought process is why most of the general public limits themselves to costly, proprietary services. The tech industry is huge and understanding it all is impossible, but buying trust isn’t the answer to guaranteed safety. There is plenty of fantastic open-source software available and it shouldn’t only be accessible to experienced, tech savvy individuals. And, as we move toward a more tech based culture, the up and coming generations can have an especially difficult time trying to explain this misconstrued conclusion to their older peers. Jim Salter from Opensource.com addressed this issue with an open letter to all parents with kids that want to use open-source software. He goes on to say free open-source software (FOSS) “is not “stolen” software. Free software licenses like the GPL and the BSD and Apache licenses allow users the ability to freely use, and developers the ability to freely develop, the software placed under those licenses. Another important thing to understand about FOSS is that it is not merely “free” in the sense of “free in every box of cereal.” Making a new copy of a piece of software literally costs nothing at all—this has made it possible for community efforts to produce world-class products in a way material goods never could be.” Helping the general public to understand the definition and motivation behind open-source will bring it out of the shadows of the industry and help it become mainstream. You can read his letter here: http://ift.tt/1UnfwRq

3 2

Freeswitch over docker
by Alejandro Ferrari 15 Dec '15

15 Dec '15

Hi all, Someone using Freeswitch with docker? I'll like to know the feedback if some use and if has some link to share. Thanks Alejandro

1 0

Push to talk
by Michael Nielsen 15 Dec '15

15 Dec '15

Is it possible to add push to talk capabilities to FreeSWITCH, perhaps via mod_conference?

5 9