Thread: RE: www2 Down AGAIN |
|
It seems WW2 is down again! all phones are unable to get a line and when logging in through the web i get
nativecode=Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock' (111)] ** mysql://asteriskuser:amp109@localhost/asterisk
so I am unable to change our server, this means yet again we have no phone system, the only way I could get onto this board was through www5 but when I try to go to our account we get bounced to www2 and therefore unable to fix the issue!
so much for the new status promised last month when it when down
"Motivated by the last two outages on May 1st (www5) and May 19th (www3) we have installed a state-of-the-art monitoring system that can also detect failures in SIP registration. You can obtain status info at http://pbxes.org/status."
|
|
Thread: RE: WWW5 Down |
|
We are currently unable to register our phones (pbxes.org), also although we can get to the homepage we cannot log in, but strangely we can log into this forum, can you please look into this as we are unable to receive any calls. I have tried from a number of UK sites with different ISP's.
|
|
Thread: |
|
22.08.2007 12:23 |
Forum: Bugs |
Thanks for your reply, maybe I did not explain myself properly.
We are having a lot of calls dropped, when the caller calls in you get no ring tone for about 15 seconds then the line goes dead with a constant beep noise.
A seperate issue maybe related is we get the same effect if the first extension in a hunt group is turned off. I believe that that is the group is set to hunt and the first extension is "not connected" then it should ring on the next in the list and so on.
We also keep getting, at least once a day some of the extensions fail to dial out and we get "Reorder" shown on the phones display. A reboot of the phones fixes the issue and then they are fine for about a day and then it happens again.
The phones are Cisco 7940 with the latest SIP firmware.
Thanks for your help.
|
|
Thread: |
|
We have a major issue, recently we have had a lot of customer complaining that they cannot call in. What I have found is that if I have a ring group with the ring mode set to hunt,
for example
100
101
102
etc,
If the first phone (100) has lost its registration or turned off. The call does not failover to the next extension. I have tested this with numerous ring groups. can someone please investigate.
thank you.
|
|
Thread: RE: Cisco 7941G "Registering" and Symetric NAT |
|
Is there anyway that pbxes could disable nat for one of my extensions (as per RFC compliance nat should not be used anyway at the pbx end) so I can test.
From googling this seems to be a common problem with oter providers but each of theose where able to easily fix by turnign of nat for the extensions at the pbx end.
Apart from this problem we have been increadibly impressed with pbxes.com and would like to continue ing your service.
|
|
Thread: RE: Cisco 7941G "Registering" and Symetric NAT |
|
We are have a lot of trouble gettign our ne wCisco 7941G phone to work we previously used Cisco 7940G & 7960G and these were easy to setup, but not the new version.
Our setup is this 4 phones plugged into a switch then a reouter doing NAT on a single static public IP. I have tried DMZ'ing one of the phoen to see if nat is the issue but no luck. All the phones are stuck in Registering I can see from the ssh interface they are trying to connect but for some reason they are having trouble. I beleive the problem is some thing to do with "symetric NAT"
taken from http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Stand...out+a+local+PBX
Most consumer VOIP services, including providers that support Cisco 79x0 model phones, will not work with 79x1 phones without intervention on the provider side. Because the 79x1 phones send SIP messages from arbitrary high number UDP ports (e.g. 49000+) the symmetric NAT approach used by Asterisk (nat=yes) and most VOIP providers does not work with these phones. The 79x1 will transmit ICMP unreachable messages back to SIP proxies that attempt to respond to SIP registration using symmetric NAT (you will see inbound SIP messages from the proxy with a high number UDP port destination, assuming your router works with symmetric NAT).
The 79x1 behavior is RFC compliant, just incompatibly non-standard. Cisco support reports that this the use of random high number ports to send SIP messages is a "security enhancement" compared with Cisco's other/older products.
Any help with this matter would be great as we are looking to deploy a number of these phones in our company but we need to make sure they can work. Thanks for all your help.
|
|
Thread: RE: Labels on Ring groups |
|
It would be very useful if we could label the ring groups to describe the ring group i.e "Sales" rather than "Ring group 1".
|
|
|