Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 22:03:52 +0200 From: Leo Weppelman <leo@wau.mis.ah.nl> To: hm@kts.org Cc: freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: called-back, rejects and auto hangup Message-ID: <19980902220352.22500@wau.mis.ah.nl> In-Reply-To: <m0zEGBm-00002rC@bert.kts.org> from "Hellmuth Michaelis" on 1998/09/02 18:55 %2B0200 References: <19980901143626.40046@wau.mis.ah.nl> <m0zEGBm-00002rC@bert.kts.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Note: trace send to Hellmuth only - it's about 25Kb. If you really want it
too, please ask ;-)
On Wed 02 Sep 1998, Hellmuth Michaelis wrote:
> Leo Weppelman wrote:
>
> > When things are not working as they should, the actions in the log
> > indicate that the reject never arrives at my machine at home. This means
> > that at my end, the incoming call is not recognized because the connection
> > entry is still active (still dialing....).
>
> If i recall it correctly, a non-answered SETUP takes 8 seconds to cause
> a reaction at the remote end. Then you should at least 10..12 seconds after
> the initial call to the remote receive something. If not, something is
> wrong, wherever it is.
The trace, as I read it, basically says:
21:19:40 SETUP from home to work
21:19:45 ALERT from work [ this was the 'ringing' - other thread ? ]
21:19:45 - Other end rejects and hangs up (as seen in the remote logs)
21:19:47 INCOMING call from remote, not accepted by i4b (entry busy)
....... various retries from remote
21:21 !! DISCONNECT from initial dial-out
Well, at this time the remote had already given up - who wouldn't ;-)
> > As fix (stop-gap) I modified i4b to just hangup the line after 2 seconds
> > when dialing out on a calledback connection (see diff below).
>
> This _might_ be an idea, but i find it a bit strange ...
Yes and no... By calling the remote and hanging up fairly soon afterwards,
the remote has enough info to decide it's actions. I really don't even
_want_ the call to be answered. What _is_ strange is the fact that the reject
and hangup do not reach my machine at home.
The cause of action I took was inspired by an expirienced Linux isdn user
who showed me that this this was the way it works in Linux too. Wether this
is based on experiences like this or just 'thought up' as a nice feature,
I was unable to find out. That's why I'm seeking opinions ;-)
> > My question is, is this a reasonable/sensible thing to do? If it is, I
> > think my patch should be expanded a bit with a tunable hangup time (0 ==
> > no hangup).
>
> If this is really a fix for your problem and does not overlay a bug in i4b
> (or your PBX or so) then it seems to be something which can be added.
On my end, the Teles is directly connected to the NT1. At work, things are
more complicated I guess. I think I am unable to find it out exactly...
Leo.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isdn" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980902220352.22500>