send fax via google voice.
Google Voice integration with FS works fine. but sending fax seems not working. 12068235374 is a K7 number, If I dial it , I can hear fax machine answering sound. In fact, people has used GV to send fax via fax machine. ( http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html) Is this problem related with mod_dingaling? please take a look! thanks itch@internal> originate dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com&txfax(/tmp/test.tiff) +OK c20e3fc4-4784-11e0-8d1d-eda21484fd55 2011-03-05 16:00:33.808039 [NOTICE] switch_channel.c:808 New Channel dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com[c20e3fc4-4784-11e0-8d1d-eda21484fd55] freeswitch@internal> 2011-03-05 16:00:33.809595 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1824 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_NEW -> CS_INIT 2011-03-05 16:00:33.809595 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:33.809595 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:33.810718 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_INIT 2011-03-05 16:00:33.810718 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:356 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State INIT 2011-03-05 16:00:33.810718 [NOTICE] mod_dingaling.c:1110 Ring-Ready dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com! 2011-03-05 16:00:33.811202 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1063 Don't have my codec yet here's one 2011-03-05 16:00:33.811202 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1083 Send Describe [PCMU@8000] 2011-03-05 16:00:34.000304 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:34.000304 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1083 Send Describe [PCMU@8000] 2011-03-05 16:00:34.311385 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:34.311385 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1008 Send Candidate 192.168.1.146:17960 [9CsLT8VWsB1yDqnv] 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3279 3 candidates 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3299 candidate 74.125.53.126:19295 PASS ACL wan.auto 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3351 Acceptable Candidate 74.125.53.126:19295 2011-03-05 16:00:40.334509 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:40.334509 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3193 Already decided on a codec 2011-03-05 16:00:40.336590 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:865 Set Read Codec to PCMU@8000 2011-03-05 16:00:40.336590 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:880 Set Write Codec to PCMU@8000 2011-03-05 16:00:40.337483 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:892 SETUP RTP 192.168.1.146:17960 -> 74.125.53.126:19295 2011-03-05 16:00:40.337483 [DEBUG] switch_rtp.c:1429 Starting timer [soft] 160 bytes per 20ms 2011-03-05 16:00:40.339652 [DEBUG] switch_rtp.c:3775 Activate VAD codec PCMU 20ms 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:2782 (dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change DOWN -> ACTIVE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [NOTICE] mod_dingaling.c:1202 Channel [dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com] has been answered 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1205 (dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_INIT -> CS_ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:356 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State INIT going to sleep 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:1657 (dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change ACTIVE -> RINGING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:359 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1219 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_ivr_originate.c:66 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_ROUTING -> CS_CONSUME_MEDIA 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_ivr_originate.c:3388 Originate Resulted in Success: [dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_commands.c:3194 (dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_CONSUME_MEDIA -> CS_EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:359 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State ROUTING going to sleep 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:1659 (dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change RINGING -> ACTIVE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.342729 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:366 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.342729 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1236 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.342729 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:157 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com Standard EXECUTE EXECUTE dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.comtxfax(/tmp/test.tiff) 2011-03-05 16:00:40.344059 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:1092 Raw read codec activation Success L16 20000 2011-03-05 16:00:40.344059 [DEBUG] switch_core_codec.c:116 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com Push codec L16:10 2011-03-05 16:00:40.344059 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:1108 Raw write codec activation Success L16 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3411 hungup dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:710 Terminate called from line 3412 state=CS_EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:2535 (dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change ACTIVE -> HANGUP 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [NOTICE] mod_dingaling.c:731 Hangup dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [CS_EXECUTE] [NORMAL_CLEARING] 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:2551 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [KILL] 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3413 End Call 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:323 ============================================================================== 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:335 Fax processing not successful - result (49) The call dropped prematurely. 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:340 Remote station id: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:341 Local station id: SpanDSP Fax Ident 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:342 Pages transferred: 0 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:344 Total fax pages: 0 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:345 Image resolution: 0x0 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:346 Transfer Rate: 14400 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:348 ECM status off 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:349 remote country: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:350 remote vendor: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:351 remote model: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:353 ============================================================================== 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_codec.c:141 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com Restore previous codec PCMU:0. 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:2045 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com skip receive message [APPLICATION_EXEC_COMPLETE] (channel is hungup already) 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:366 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State EXECUTE going to sleep 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_HANGUP 2011-03-05 16:00:42.659331 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:557 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State HANGUP 2011-03-05 16:00:42.659331 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1317 dingaling/xmppc/+ 12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL HANGUP
I'd personally not go there if you need to use GV to fax. Faxing with uLaw isn't reliable at all. You're just playing with fire if you do decide to use uLaw to fax stuff. Besides, google voice's quality is just horrible anyways. On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:08 PM, envelopes envelopes <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
Google Voice integration with FS works fine. but sending fax seems not working. 12068235374 is a K7 number, If I dial it , I can hear fax machine answering sound. In fact, people has used GV to send fax via fax machine. (http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html) Is this problem related with mod_dingaling?
please take a look!
thanks
itch@internal> originate dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com &txfax(/tmp/test.tiff) +OK c20e3fc4-4784-11e0-8d1d-eda21484fd55
2011-03-05 16:00:33.808039 [NOTICE] switch_channel.c:808 New Channel dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [c20e3fc4-4784-11e0-8d1d-eda21484fd55] freeswitch@internal> 2011-03-05 16:00:33.809595 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1824 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_NEW -> CS_INIT 2011-03-05 16:00:33.809595 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:33.809595 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:33.810718 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_INIT 2011-03-05 16:00:33.810718 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:356 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State INIT 2011-03-05 16:00:33.810718 [NOTICE] mod_dingaling.c:1110 Ring-Ready dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com! 2011-03-05 16:00:33.811202 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1063 Don't have my codec yet here's one 2011-03-05 16:00:33.811202 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1083 Send Describe [PCMU@8000] 2011-03-05 16:00:34.000304 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:34.000304 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1083 Send Describe [PCMU@8000] 2011-03-05 16:00:34.311385 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:34.311385 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1008 Send Candidate 192.168.1.146:17960 [9CsLT8VWsB1yDqnv] 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3279 3 candidates 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3299 candidate 74.125.53.126:19295 PASS ACL wan.auto 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3351 Acceptable Candidate 74.125.53.126:19295 2011-03-05 16:00:40.334509 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:40.334509 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3193 Already decided on a codec 2011-03-05 16:00:40.336590 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:865 Set Read Codec to PCMU@8000 2011-03-05 16:00:40.336590 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:880 Set Write Codec to PCMU@8000 2011-03-05 16:00:40.337483 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:892 SETUP RTP 192.168.1.146:17960 -> 74.125.53.126:19295 2011-03-05 16:00:40.337483 [DEBUG] switch_rtp.c:1429 Starting timer [soft] 160 bytes per 20ms 2011-03-05 16:00:40.339652 [DEBUG] switch_rtp.c:3775 Activate VAD codec PCMU 20ms 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:2782 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change DOWN -> ACTIVE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [NOTICE] mod_dingaling.c:1202 Channel [dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com] has been answered 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1205 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_INIT -> CS_ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:356 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State INIT going to sleep 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:1657 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change ACTIVE -> RINGING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:359 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1219 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_ivr_originate.c:66 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_ROUTING -> CS_CONSUME_MEDIA 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_ivr_originate.c:3388 Originate Resulted in Success: [dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_commands.c:3194 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_CONSUME_MEDIA -> CS_EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:359 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State ROUTING going to sleep 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:1659 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change RINGING -> ACTIVE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.342729 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:366 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.342729 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1236 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.342729 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:157 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com Standard EXECUTE EXECUTE dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com txfax(/tmp/test.tiff) 2011-03-05 16:00:40.344059 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:1092 Raw read codec activation Success L16 20000 2011-03-05 16:00:40.344059 [DEBUG] switch_core_codec.c:116 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com Push codec L16:10 2011-03-05 16:00:40.344059 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:1108 Raw write codec activation Success L16 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3411 hungup dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:710 Terminate called from line 3412 state=CS_EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:2535 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change ACTIVE -> HANGUP 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [NOTICE] mod_dingaling.c:731 Hangup dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [CS_EXECUTE] [NORMAL_CLEARING] 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:2551 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [KILL] 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3413 End Call 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:323 ============================================================================== 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:335 Fax processing not successful - result (49) The call dropped prematurely. 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:340 Remote station id: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:341 Local station id: SpanDSP Fax Ident 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:342 Pages transferred: 0 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:344 Total fax pages: 0 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:345 Image resolution: 0x0 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:346 Transfer Rate: 14400 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:348 ECM status off 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:349 remote country: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:350 remote vendor: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:351 remote model: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:353 ============================================================================== 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_codec.c:141 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com Restore previous codec PCMU:0. 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:2045 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com skip receive message [APPLICATION_EXEC_COMPLETE] (channel is hungup already) 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:366 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State EXECUTE going to sleep 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_HANGUP 2011-03-05 16:00:42.659331 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:557 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State HANGUP 2011-03-05 16:00:42.659331 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1317 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL HANGUP
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
Why is PCMU codec not reliable? On Mar 5, 2011 6:34 PM, "curriegrad2004" <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
I'd personally not go there if you need to use GV to fax. Faxing with uLaw isn't reliable at all. You're just playing with fire if you do decide to use uLaw to fax stuff. Besides, google voice's quality is just horrible anyways.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:08 PM, envelopes envelopes <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
Google Voice integration with FS works fine. but sending fax seems not working. 12068235374 is a K7 number, If I dial it , I can hear fax machine answering sound. In fact, people has used GV to send fax via fax machine. (http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html) Is this problem related with mod_dingaling?
please take a look!
thanks
itch@internal> originate dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com &txfax(/tmp/test.tiff) +OK c20e3fc4-4784-11e0-8d1d-eda21484fd55
2011-03-05 16:00:33.808039 [NOTICE] switch_channel.c:808 New Channel dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [c20e3fc4-4784-11e0-8d1d-eda21484fd55] freeswitch@internal> 2011-03-05 16:00:33.809595 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1824 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_NEW -> CS_INIT 2011-03-05 16:00:33.809595 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:33.809595 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:33.810718 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_INIT 2011-03-05 16:00:33.810718 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:356 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State INIT 2011-03-05 16:00:33.810718 [NOTICE] mod_dingaling.c:1110 Ring-Ready dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com! 2011-03-05 16:00:33.811202 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1063 Don't have my codec yet here's one 2011-03-05 16:00:33.811202 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1083 Send Describe [PCMU@8000] 2011-03-05 16:00:34.000304 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:34.000304 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1083 Send Describe [PCMU@8000] 2011-03-05 16:00:34.311385 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:34.311385 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1008 Send Candidate 192.168.1.146:17960 [9CsLT8VWsB1yDqnv] 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3279 3 candidates 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3299 candidate 74.125.53.126:19295 PASS ACL wan.auto 2011-03-05 16:00:34.707433 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3351 Acceptable Candidate 74.125.53.126:19295 2011-03-05 16:00:40.334509 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:40.334509 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3193 Already decided on a codec 2011-03-05 16:00:40.336590 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:865 Set Read Codec to PCMU@8000 2011-03-05 16:00:40.336590 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:880 Set Write Codec to PCMU@8000 2011-03-05 16:00:40.337483 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:892 SETUP RTP 192.168.1.146:17960 -> 74.125.53.126:19295 2011-03-05 16:00:40.337483 [DEBUG] switch_rtp.c:1429 Starting timer [soft] 160 bytes per 20ms 2011-03-05 16:00:40.339652 [DEBUG] switch_rtp.c:3775 Activate VAD codec PCMU 20ms 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:2782 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change DOWN -> ACTIVE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [NOTICE] mod_dingaling.c:1202 Channel [dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com] has been answered 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1205 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_INIT -> CS_ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:356 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State INIT going to sleep 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:1657 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change ACTIVE -> RINGING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:359 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1219 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL ROUTING 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_ivr_originate.c:66 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_ROUTING -> CS_CONSUME_MEDIA 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_ivr_originate.c:3388 Originate Resulted in Success: [dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_commands.c:3194 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State Change CS_CONSUME_MEDIA -> CS_EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:359 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State ROUTING going to sleep 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.340311 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:1659 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change RINGING -> ACTIVE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.342729 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:366 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.342729 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1236 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:40.342729 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:157 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com Standard EXECUTE EXECUTE dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com txfax(/tmp/test.tiff) 2011-03-05 16:00:40.344059 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:1092 Raw read codec activation Success L16 20000 2011-03-05 16:00:40.344059 [DEBUG] switch_core_codec.c:116 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com Push codec L16:10 2011-03-05 16:00:40.344059 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:1108 Raw write codec activation Success L16 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:2941 using Existing session for 6100480476 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3411 hungup dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:710 Terminate called from line 3412 state=CS_EXECUTE 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:2535 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Callstate Change ACTIVE -> HANGUP 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [NOTICE] mod_dingaling.c:731 Hangup dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [CS_EXECUTE] [NORMAL_CLEARING] 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] switch_channel.c:2551 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [KILL] 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:1116 Send signal dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com [BREAK] 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1348 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL KILL 2011-03-05 16:00:42.649258 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:3413 End Call 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:323
==============================================================================
2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:335 Fax processing not successful - result (49) The call dropped prematurely. 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:340 Remote station id: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:341 Local station id: SpanDSP Fax Ident 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:342 Pages transferred: 0 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:344 Total fax pages: 0 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:345 Image resolution: 0x0 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:346 Transfer Rate: 14400 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:348 ECM status off 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:349 remote country: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:350 remote vendor: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:351 remote model: 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] mod_spandsp_fax.c:353
==============================================================================
2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_codec.c:141 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com Restore previous codec PCMU:0. 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_session.c:2045 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com skip receive message [APPLICATION_EXEC_COMPLETE] (channel is hungup already) 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:366 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State EXECUTE going to sleep 2011-03-05 16:00:42.658379 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:320 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) Running State Change CS_HANGUP 2011-03-05 16:00:42.659331 [DEBUG] switch_core_state_machine.c:557 (dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com) State HANGUP 2011-03-05 16:00:42.659331 [DEBUG] mod_dingaling.c:1317 dingaling/xmppc/+12068235374@voice.google.com CHANNEL HANGUP
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
And relativity comes into play too. Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched networks. On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote:
Why is PCMU codec not reliable?
Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss.
Steve
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
ok, Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax machine did work .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html). On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com>wrote:
And relativity comes into play too.
Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched networks.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote:
Why is PCMU codec not reliable?
Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss.
Steve
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
Just because it worked for somebody, it doesn't means it can work for you. In theory, yes uLaw is supposed to work with faxing, but the chances of sending a fax successfully is quite slim in the real world. Google voice was intended for voice in the first place, not for faxing. Yes I know, somebody did manage to get the fax through mainly because he was plain lucky or he had an ISP that can actually handle VoIP correctly. To sum it up, the simple answer to GV faxing: If you like to play with fire, go ahead and try. I'm telling you this because I've been there and done that, faxing over uLaw isn't pretty at all. On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:35 PM, envelopes envelopes <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
ok,
Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax machine did work .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html).
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
And relativity comes into play too.
Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched networks.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote:
Why is PCMU codec not reliable?
Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss.
Steve
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
Ok 1. will sending a fax over it work... The answer is yes it will work.. 2. will it work reliably, no Faxing just needs to die already... The problem you have here with Faxing over G711 (PCMU or PCMA) is that faxing uses a modem to encode a digital signal into an analog carrier meant for a circuit switch voice network with a constant amount of delay and guaranteed delivery of the entire analog stream VoIP by definition is Voice Over Internet Protocol... IP is a packet switched network, where you can no guarantee a constant amount delay (latency) ... Not to mention it is not common to see a udp packet or 2 missing along the way. Where as 1 20ms packet may not seem like much to you, that¹s roughtly equivalent to 575bytes of data in the fax and it will screw up the fax either causing a corruption of the data, or a drop in the analog modem carrier which requires a retrain... On 3/5/11 11:35 PM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
ok,
Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax machine did work .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html).
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
And relativity comes into play too.
Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched networks.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote:
Why is PCMU codec not reliable?
Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss.
Steve
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many people out there still do have a fax machine :) On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Ken Rice <krice@freeswitch.org> wrote:
Ok
will sending a fax over it work... The answer is yes it will work.. will it work reliably, no
Faxing just needs to die already... The problem you have here with Faxing over G711 (PCMU or PCMA) is that faxing uses a modem to encode a digital signal into an analog carrier meant for a circuit switch voice network with a constant amount of delay and guaranteed delivery of the entire analog stream
VoIP by definition is Voice Over Internet Protocol... IP is a packet switched network, where you can no guarantee a constant amount delay (latency) ... Not to mention it is not common to see a udp packet or 2 missing along the way.
Where as 1 20ms packet may not seem like much to you, that’s roughtly equivalent to 575bytes of data in the fax and it will screw up the fax either causing a corruption of the data, or a drop in the analog modem carrier which requires a retrain...
On 3/5/11 11:35 PM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
ok,
Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax machine did work .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html).
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
And relativity comes into play too.
Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched networks.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote:
Why is PCMU codec not reliable?
Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss.
Steve
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
________________________________ _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
that is not true. Real estator/law firm/accounting offices/travel agents...many of them still prefer fax for security reasons. I am always worried about sending my driver license pdf file via e-mail. On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:34 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com>wrote:
That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many people out there still do have a fax machine :)
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Ken Rice <krice@freeswitch.org> wrote:
Ok
will sending a fax over it work... The answer is yes it will work.. will it work reliably, no
Faxing just needs to die already... The problem you have here with Faxing over G711 (PCMU or PCMA) is that faxing uses a modem to encode a digital signal into an analog carrier meant for a circuit switch voice network with a constant amount of delay and guaranteed delivery of the entire analog stream
VoIP by definition is Voice Over Internet Protocol... IP is a packet switched network, where you can no guarantee a constant amount delay (latency) ... Not to mention it is not common to see a udp packet or 2 missing along the way.
Where as 1 20ms packet may not seem like much to you, that’s roughtly equivalent to 575bytes of data in the fax and it will screw up the fax either causing a corruption of the data, or a drop in the analog modem carrier which requires a retrain...
On 3/5/11 11:35 PM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
ok,
Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax machine did work .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html).
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com
wrote:
And relativity comes into play too.
Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched networks.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote:
Why is PCMU codec not reliable?
Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss.
Steve
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE: http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
________________________________ _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
What security reasons? Its just as easy to tap a PSTN line as it is to sniff a network connection, the only difference is you might need a little bit different hardware... If it were about security, fax machines would actually encrypt a fax but they don¹t... On 3/6/11 1:55 AM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
that is not true.
Real estator/law firm/accounting offices/travel agents...many of them still prefer fax for security reasons. I am always worried about sending my driver license pdf file via e-mail.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:34 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many people out there still do have a fax machine :)
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Ken Rice <krice@freeswitch.org> wrote:
Ok
will sending a fax over it work... The answer is yes it will work.. will it work reliably, no
Faxing just needs to die already... The problem you have here with Faxing over G711 (PCMU or PCMA) is that faxing uses a modem to encode a digital signal into an analog carrier meant for a circuit switch voice network with a constant amount of delay and guaranteed delivery of the entire analog stream
VoIP by definition is Voice Over Internet Protocol... IP is a packet switched network, where you can no guarantee a constant amount delay (latency) ... Not to mention it is not common to see a udp packet or 2 missing along the way.
Where as 1 20ms packet may not seem like much to you, that¹s roughtly equivalent to 575bytes of data in the fax and it will screw up the fax either causing a corruption of the data, or a drop in the analog modem carrier which requires a retrain...
On 3/5/11 11:35 PM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
ok,
Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax machine did work .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html).
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
And relativity comes into play too.
Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched networks.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote: >> >> Why is PCMU codec not reliable? >> >> Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss.
Steve
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
________________________________ _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice.I think it's more hard for a guy to hack your US pstn line if he lives in Australia... fax on internet can be hacked from everywhere... ----- Original Message ----- From: Ken Rice To: FreeSWITCH Users Help Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice. What security reasons? Its just as easy to tap a PSTN line as it is to sniff a network connection, the only difference is you might need a little bit different hardware... If it were about security, fax machines would actually encrypt a fax but they don't... On 3/6/11 1:55 AM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote: that is not true. Real estator/law firm/accounting offices/travel agents...many of them still prefer fax for security reasons. I am always worried about sending my driver license pdf file via e-mail. On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:34 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote: That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many people out there still do have a fax machine :) On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Ken Rice <krice@freeswitch.org> wrote: > Ok > > will sending a fax over it work... The answer is yes it will work.. > will it work reliably, no > > Faxing just needs to die already... > The problem you have here with Faxing over G711 (PCMU or PCMA) is that > faxing uses a modem to encode a digital signal into an analog carrier meant > for a circuit switch voice network with a constant amount of delay and > guaranteed delivery of the entire analog stream > > VoIP by definition is Voice Over Internet Protocol... IP is a packet > switched network, where you can no guarantee a constant amount delay > (latency) ... Not to mention it is not common to see a udp packet or 2 > missing along the way. > > Where as 1 20ms packet may not seem like much to you, that's roughtly > equivalent to 575bytes of data in the fax and it will screw up the fax > either causing a corruption of the data, or a drop in the analog modem > carrier which requires a retrain... > > > > > On 3/5/11 11:35 PM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote: > > ok, > > Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling > supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax > machine did work > .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html). > > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> > wrote: > > And relativity comes into play too. > > Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't > guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be > sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched > networks. > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote: >> On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote: >>> >>> Why is PCMU codec not reliable? >>> >>> >> Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss. >> >> Steve >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list >> FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org >> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users >> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users >> http://www.freeswitch.org >> > > _______________________________________________ > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org > > > ________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org > > _______________________________________________ > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org > > _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
Geography doesn¹t stop a determined attacker... Just because its a little more difficult, that doesn¹t mean it is secure... If that were the case then Classified US Government Faxes wouldn¹t require crypto gear in line (see STU-III for an example of this that¹s over 20 years old) K On 3/6/11 11:08 AM, "Madovsky" <infos@madovsky.org> wrote:
I think it's more hard for a guy to hack your US pstn line if he lives in Australia... fax on internet can be hacked from everywhere...
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Rice <mailto:krice@freeswitch.org>
To: FreeSWITCH Users Help <mailto:freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice.
What security reasons? Its just as easy to tap a PSTN line as it is to sniff a network connection, the only difference is you might need a little bit different hardware...
If it were about security, fax machines would actually encrypt a fax but they don¹t...
On 3/6/11 1:55 AM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
that is not true.
Real estator/law firm/accounting offices/travel agents...many of them still prefer fax for security reasons. I am always worried about sending my driver license pdf file via e-mail.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:34 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many people out there still do have a fax machine :)
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Ken Rice <krice@freeswitch.org> wrote:
Ok
will sending a fax over it work... The answer is yes it will work.. will it work reliably, no
Faxing just needs to die already... The problem you have here with Faxing over G711 (PCMU or PCMA) is that faxing uses a modem to encode a digital signal into an analog carrier meant for a circuit switch voice network with a constant amount of delay and guaranteed delivery of the entire analog stream
VoIP by definition is Voice Over Internet Protocol... IP is a packet switched network, where you can no guarantee a constant amount delay (latency) ... Not to mention it is not common to see a udp packet or 2 missing along the way.
Where as 1 20ms packet may not seem like much to you, that¹s roughtly equivalent to 575bytes of data in the fax and it will screw up the fax either causing a corruption of the data, or a drop in the analog modem carrier which requires a retrain...
On 3/5/11 11:35 PM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
ok,
Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax machine did work .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html).
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
And relativity comes into play too.
Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched networks.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote: >> On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote: > >>> > >>> Why is PCMU codec not reliable? > >>> > >>> >> Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss. >> >> Steve >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list >> FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org >> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users >> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users >> http://www.freeswitch.org >>
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
________________________________ _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice.because crypto was and is not allowed in some countries also... ----- Original Message ----- From: Ken Rice To: FreeSWITCH Users Help Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 12:23 PM Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice. Geography doesn't stop a determined attacker... Just because its a little more difficult, that doesn't mean it is secure... If that were the case then Classified US Government Faxes wouldn't require crypto gear in line (see STU-III for an example of this that's over 20 years old) K On 3/6/11 11:08 AM, "Madovsky" <infos@madovsky.org> wrote: I think it's more hard for a guy to hack your US pstn line if he lives in Australia... fax on internet can be hacked from everywhere... ----- Original Message ----- From: Ken Rice <mailto:krice@freeswitch.org> To: FreeSWITCH Users Help <mailto:freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org> Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice. What security reasons? Its just as easy to tap a PSTN line as it is to sniff a network connection, the only difference is you might need a little bit different hardware... If it were about security, fax machines would actually encrypt a fax but they don't... On 3/6/11 1:55 AM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote: that is not true. Real estator/law firm/accounting offices/travel agents...many of them still prefer fax for security reasons. I am always worried about sending my driver license pdf file via e-mail. On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:34 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote: That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many people out there still do have a fax machine :) On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Ken Rice <krice@freeswitch.org> wrote: > Ok > > will sending a fax over it work... The answer is yes it will work.. > will it work reliably, no > > Faxing just needs to die already... > The problem you have here with Faxing over G711 (PCMU or PCMA) is that > faxing uses a modem to encode a digital signal into an analog carrier meant > for a circuit switch voice network with a constant amount of delay and > guaranteed delivery of the entire analog stream > > VoIP by definition is Voice Over Internet Protocol... IP is a packet > switched network, where you can no guarantee a constant amount delay > (latency) ... Not to mention it is not common to see a udp packet or 2 > missing along the way. > > Where as 1 20ms packet may not seem like much to you, that's roughtly > equivalent to 575bytes of data in the fax and it will screw up the fax > either causing a corruption of the data, or a drop in the analog modem > carrier which requires a retrain... > > > > > On 3/5/11 11:35 PM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote: > > ok, > > Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling > supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax > machine did work > .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html). > > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> > wrote: > > And relativity comes into play too. > > Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't > guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be > sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched > networks. > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote: >> On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote: >>> >>> Why is PCMU codec not reliable? >>> >>> >> Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss. >> >> Steve >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list >> FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org >> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users >> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users >> http://www.freeswitch.org >> > > _______________________________________________ > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org > > > ________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org > > _______________________________________________ > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org > > _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
That makes it even easier in those countries... The whole point is anywhere along the line and then some on the PSTN there are multiple points in which a call can be compromised just as easy if not easier then cracking a network along the way. Any 10 year old with 5 minutes of instruction can build a pstn line tap and listen to phone calls... Its only a step up from that to tap fax line... That being said, just because its perceived by luddites to be more secure then say an email doesn¹t make it so... On 3/6/11 11:33 AM, "Madovsky" <infos@madovsky.org> wrote:
because crypto was and is not allowed in some countries also...
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Rice <mailto:krice@freeswitch.org>
To: FreeSWITCH Users Help <mailto:freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice.
Geography doesn¹t stop a determined attacker...
Just because its a little more difficult, that doesn¹t mean it is secure... If that were the case then Classified US Government Faxes wouldn¹t require crypto gear in line (see STU-III for an example of this that¹s over 20 years old)
K
On 3/6/11 11:08 AM, "Madovsky" <infos@madovsky.org> wrote:
I think it's more hard for a guy to hack your US pstn line if he lives in Australia... fax on internet can be hacked from everywhere...
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Rice <mailto:krice@freeswitch.org>
To: FreeSWITCH Users Help <mailto:freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice.
What security reasons? Its just as easy to tap a PSTN line as it is to sniff a network connection, the only difference is you might need a little bit different hardware...
If it were about security, fax machines would actually encrypt a fax but they don¹t...
On 3/6/11 1:55 AM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
that is not true.
Real estator/law firm/accounting offices/travel agents...many of them still prefer fax for security reasons. I am always worried about sending my driver license pdf file via e-mail.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:34 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many people out there still do have a fax machine :)
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Ken Rice <krice@freeswitch.org> wrote: > > Ok > > > > will sending a fax over it work... The answer is yes it will work.. > > will it work reliably, no > > > > Faxing just needs to die already... > > The problem you have here with Faxing over G711 (PCMU or PCMA) is > that > > faxing uses a modem to encode a digital signal into an analog > carrier meant > > for a circuit switch voice network with a constant amount of delay > and > > guaranteed delivery of the entire analog stream > > > > VoIP by definition is Voice Over Internet Protocol... IP is a packet > > switched network, where you can no guarantee a constant amount delay > > (latency) ... Not to mention it is not common to see a udp packet or
2
> > missing along the way. > > > > Where as 1 20ms packet may not seem like much to you, that¹s > roughtly > > equivalent to 575bytes of data in the fax and it will screw up the > fax > > either causing a corruption of the data, or a drop in the analog > modem > > carrier which requires a retrain... > > > > > > > > > > On 3/5/11 11:35 PM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > ok, > > > > Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether > mod_dingaling > > supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from > fax > > machine did work > > .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html). > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 > <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > And relativity comes into play too. > > > > Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't > > guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be > > sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet > switched > > networks. > > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> > wrote: >> >> On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Why is PCMU codec not reliable? >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss. >> >> >> >> Steve >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list >> >> FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org >> >> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users >> >> >> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users >> >> http://www.freeswitch.org >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > > > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > > http://www.freeswitch.org > > > > > > ________________________________ > > _______________________________________________ > > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > > > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > > http://www.freeswitch.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > > > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > > http://www.freeswitch.org > > > >
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
I do not think it makes any difference if it is secure or not. In a court in Germany, a fax is a document, an email is not, at least not yet. So contracts need to be faxed, not emailed. We can discuss the security of fax as much as we want, as long as the regulations make fax a requirement, it will stay around. Am 06.03.2011 um 18:44 schrieb Ken Rice:
That makes it even easier in those countries... The whole point is anywhere along the line and then some on the PSTN there are multiple points in which a call can be compromised just as easy if not easier then cracking a network along the way. Any 10 year old with 5 minutes of instruction can build a pstn line tap and listen to phone calls... Its only a step up from that to tap fax line... That being said, just because its perceived by luddites to be more secure then say an email doesn’t make it so...
On 3/6/11 11:33 AM, "Madovsky" <infos@madovsky.org> wrote:
because crypto was and is not allowed in some countries also...
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Rice <mailto:krice@freeswitch.org>
To: FreeSWITCH Users Help <mailto:freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice.
Geography doesn’t stop a determined attacker...
Just because its a little more difficult, that doesn’t mean it is secure... If that were the case then Classified US Government Faxes wouldn’t require crypto gear in line (see STU-III for an example of this that’s over 20 years old)
K
On 3/6/11 11:08 AM, "Madovsky" <infos@madovsky.org> wrote:
I think it's more hard for a guy to hack your US pstn line if he lives in Australia... fax on internet can be hacked from everywhere...
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Rice <mailto:krice@freeswitch.org>
To: FreeSWITCH Users Help <mailto:freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] send fax via google voice.
What security reasons? Its just as easy to tap a PSTN line as it is to sniff a network connection, the only difference is you might need a little bit different hardware...
If it were about security, fax machines would actually encrypt a fax but they don’t...
On 3/6/11 1:55 AM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote:
that is not true.
Real estator/law firm/accounting offices/travel agents...many of them still prefer fax for security reasons. I am always worried about sending my driver license pdf file via e-mail.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:34 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many > people out there still do have a fax machine :) > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Ken Rice <krice@freeswitch.org> wrote: > > Ok > > > > will sending a fax over it work... The answer is yes it will work.. > > will it work reliably, no > > > > Faxing just needs to die already... > > The problem you have here with Faxing over G711 (PCMU or PCMA) is that > > faxing uses a modem to encode a digital signal into an analog carrier meant > > for a circuit switch voice network with a constant amount of delay and > > guaranteed delivery of the entire analog stream > > > > VoIP by definition is Voice Over Internet Protocol... IP is a packet > > switched network, where you can no guarantee a constant amount delay > > (latency) ... Not to mention it is not common to see a udp packet or 2 > > missing along the way. > > > > Where as 1 20ms packet may not seem like much to you, that’s roughtly > > equivalent to 575bytes of data in the fax and it will screw up the fax > > either causing a corruption of the data, or a drop in the analog modem > > carrier which requires a retrain... > > > > > > > > > > On 3/5/11 11:35 PM, "envelopes envelopes" <sunwood360@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > ok, > > > > Reliability is a different issue. I am just wondering whether mod_dingaling > > supports fax via GV. because someone proved sending fax via GV from fax > > machine did work > > .(http://www.magicjacksupport.com/faxing-via-google-voice-t7412.html). > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:18 PM, curriegrad2004 <curriegrad2004@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > And relativity comes into play too. > > > > Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't > > guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be > > sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched > > networks. > > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote: > >> On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote: > >>> > >>> Why is PCMU codec not reliable? > >>> > >>> > >> Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss. > >> > >> Steve > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > >> FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > >> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > >> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > >> http://www.freeswitch.org > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > > http://www.freeswitch.org > > > > > > ________________________________ > > _______________________________________________ > > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > > http://www.freeswitch.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > > http://www.freeswitch.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > FreeSWITCH-users mailing list > FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org > http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users > UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users > http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
Michal Bielicki Geschäftsführer / CEO Seventh Signal Ltd. & Co. KG Weigandufer 45, Büro 115, D-12059 Berlin Voice: +49 30 60988730 Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRA 44413 B Ust.-ID: DE266981999 Geschäftsführer: Michal Bielicki Persönlich Haftende Gesellschafterin: Seventh Signal Ltd, 69 Great Hampton St. Birmingham, B18 6EW, GB, Company Nr.: 06889439 WWW.: http://www.seventhsignal.de
On 03/07/2011 01:08 AM, Madovsky wrote:
I think it's more hard for a guy to hack your US pstn line if he lives in Australia... fax on internet can be hacked from everywhere... There used to be some truth in that, a long time ago. It ended when arbitrary hops of ordinary PSTN calls started to be carried over IP networks. When you call from a PSTN FAX to a PSTN FAX you have little idea how the call travels. Its the same with phone banking by DTMF, and other services where people regularly send sensitive information. Its hard to mount a focussed attack on a particular person by trawling through fairly arbitrary IP communications, but you can sure harvest a lot of interesting material from a long distance these days.
Interestingly, the FAX standards do include security feature options, but I've never seen them used. The documentation lacks clarity, and I'm not sure how well most T.38 systems would handle them, but they are there. Steve
On 03/06/2011 03:34 PM, curriegrad2004 wrote:
That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many people out there still do have a fax machine :) I suspect if you make that comment again in 20 years, it will still have the smiley face at the end, but probably won't have XPS in it.
Steve
I suspect if you make that comment again in 20 years, it will still have the smiley face at the end, but probably won't have XPS in it.
That was just an example there :)
that is not true.
Real estator/law firm/accounting offices/travel agents...many of them still prefer fax for security reasons. I am always worried about sending my driver license pdf file via e-mail.
Faxing stuff over the PSTN network is no different than sending an unencrypted PDF file via e-mails. You do realize that somebody inside the VoIP provider could possibly tap on to the "line" and record everything. Now when I mean everything, they can record the entire handshake of both fax machines. Your good old POTS provider might just be doing that without letting you know, they're called "soft taps". Now faxing stuff over VoIP makes fax interception much much easier. So no, faxing stuff over the PSTN isn't technically secure, but it 'feels' secure because of the level of difficulty for the average person out there to intercept fax calls over the PSTN network. But then again your telco might be able to do this without letting you know. On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 03/06/2011 03:34 PM, curriegrad2004 wrote:
That's why PDF's/XPS/tiff's have replaced fax completely. Not many people out there still do have a fax machine :) I suspect if you make that comment again in 20 years, it will still have the smiley face at the end, but probably won't have XPS in it.
Steve
_______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
On 03/06/2011 01:18 PM, curriegrad2004 wrote:
And relativity comes into play too. Not unless you travel pretty fast. :-) Also you do need to realize that the packets sent via UDP isn't guaranteed to be in order as the fax machine expects the data to be sent in order, not out of order. That's the beauty of packet switched networks. You will also see a small number of packets arrive twice for UDP over the internet, presumably due to router bugs.
Out of order packets are not, in themselves, a problem. A jitter buffer will reorder them, if they are not excessively delayed (and the jitter buffer is not of a broken design). The real issue is excessive jitter in the packet delivery times, which is functionally equivalent to packet loss - packets have to be dropped if they arrive too late for the real time deadline of the analogue channel.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Steve Underwood<steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 03/06/2011 11:21 AM, envelopes envelopes wrote:
Why is PCMU codec not reliable?
Unsynchronised clocks, and packet loss.
Steve Steve
participants (6)
-
curriegrad2004
-
envelopes envelopes
-
Ken Rice
-
Madovsky
-
Michal Bielicki
-
Steve Underwood