I've seen this before too. I have a couple of Asterisk boxes hanging off a switch using SIP. I also used to explicitly Answer() as the call came in from the switch. My guess is our switch converts SIP signaling straight to SS7, because anytime a call came in from a specific in-state AT&T tandem, they released the call as soon as I answered it. Turns out putting a Ringing() before Answer() solved the problem. It is likely that certain carriers have equipment that is not tolerant of out-of-order messages. I say that because calls from all other operators were successful, as were calls from AT&T wireless originating on out-of-state tandems. -- Bryan On May 6, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Horacio J. Pe?a wrote: > > Thanks for the answer! > > Should the asterisk user be aware of each protocol intricacies? Shouldn't > it be the channel task to send the needed messages? Conversely, should > the user be able to make asterisk to do things not allowed by the > protocols? > > Saludos! > H > > On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 11:18:56PM +0000, gustavomarsico at gmail.com wrote: >> Is not legal to send an ANM without ACM. You can send a CON instead of ANM. >> Try to put a Proceeding() in the dial plan. >> >> >> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Horacio J. Pe?a <horape at compendium.com.ar> >> Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 20:03:43 >> To: <asterisk-ss7 at lists.digium.com> >> Subject: [asterisk-ss7] ANM without ACM >> >> Hola! >> >> I'm playing with libss7 and found that if I make a dialplan like: >> >> exten => 08231451010,1,Answer >> ... >> >> the result is: >> >> 105 12.024960 2146 -> 639 ISUP(ITU) IAM (CIC 2) >> 107 12.028962 639 -> 2146 ISUP(ITU) ANM (CIC 2) >> 109 12.065962 2146 -> 639 ISUP(ITU) RSC (CIC 2) >> 111 12.068958 639 -> 2146 ISUP(ITU) RLC (CIC 2) >> 113 12.103963 2146 -> 639 ISUP(ITU) RSC (CIC 54) >> >> It seems that the switch I'm connecting to doesn't accept ANM without a >> previous ACM. Who is wrong? asterisk (libss7) sending ANM directly or >> the other switch not allowing that? >> >> Thanks!
|