Jan, I have not reported any problems with Quintum. Initialy I reported that they work: A400/A800, D-series + CMS. Later than some guy (tyang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) has overwritten my notes. I have reported a working config, which you have quoted below. It was just an example. There is no need to post any example configs as there is nothing tricky nor in Quintum setup, neither in GnuGK. 1. To register Quintum as an endpoint into GnuGK you just configure the H323SIG (H323GW for the older series) and then describe the H323ID + IP (depends on your authentication type at GnuGK) of Quintum at the RRQAuth section of Quintum. 2. For direct H.225 signalling (a.k.a. "permanent endpoint"), you just setup a static route (sr) in Quintum pointing to GnuGK. Quintum also allows you to change the call signalling port the other side accepts requests on. On the GnuGK side you allow GnuGK to accept calls from unregistered endpoints and describe the IP of Quintum as a permanent endpoint. 3. For LRQ (remote zone routing) you set again a static route, but configure the type of route as gatekeeper, not gateway. In GnuGK you set the IP of Quintum as a neighbour. It is very simple and straighthrough. The above config will work with any (well, almost any) gatekeeper/softswitch. Just because somebody has "dizzy" hands, we shall not blame any of the vendors :) Let us close the thread, please. On Tuesday 14 December 2004 18:06, Jan Willamowius wrote: > My problem with this is, that the name Quintum really pops up a lot here > and I have no way to check which report is correct and which is not. > > I have removed the "problems" comment from the entry Teodor sent in, > because he obviously didn't report that and deleted the entries where I > didn't find the mail from the person who sent it in. > > But there still remain 3 entries where people insist they where having > problems with Quintum and I'd like to leave those in there so users can > make the decision themselves. > > Maybe somebody using a Quintum succesfully can give the config notes a > quick look and if we get those waterproof, maybe the Quintum problems > will disapear. > > http://www.gnugk.org/gnugk-quintum.html > > Zygmuntowicz Michal wrote: > > Jan manages the list - Jan, could you correct this information? > > > > >From my experience it also seems that Quintums usually work fine > > > > with GnuGk. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Teodor Georgiev" <t.georgiev@xxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 4:29 PM > > > > > Based on that, looks like the problem is nor in Quintum, neither in > > > GnuGK. I also would like to ask again Michal to remove the > > > "untracable interoperability problems now and then" from the GnuGK > > > interopability list. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide > > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real > > users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start > > reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ > > > > _______________________________________________________ > > > > List: Openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549 > > Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/ -- ---------------- Teodor Georgiev ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________________ List: Openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549 Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/
