Please check the confirms shown on original post, i am already using
permenant Eps.
[snipped]
[RasSrv::PermanentEndpoints]
192.168.0.200=TESTGW;7469
Regards
Hamed
From: Teodor Georgiev <tgeorgiev@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Too many Sockets!!
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:08:43 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from lists-outbound.sourceforge.net ([66.35.250.225]) by
mc7-f25.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 15 Mar 2005
04:09:09 -0800
Received: from projects.sourceforge.net (sc8-sf-list2-b.sourceforge.net
[10.3.1.8])by sc8-sf-spam2.sourceforge.net (Postfix) with ESMTPid
9D10412731; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:08:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.12]
helo=sc8-sf-mx2.sourceforge.net)by sc8-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp
(Exim 4.30)id 1DBApf-0001fV-Qifor openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:07:31 -0800
Received: from ns1.is-bg.net([217.145.161.3] helo=mail.is-bg.net
ident=qmailr)by sc8-sf-mx2.sourceforge.net with esmtp
(TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168)(Exim 4.41)id 1DBApd-0000a4-KGfor
openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:07:31 -0800
Received: (qmail 30626 invoked by uid 1001); 15 Mar 2005 12:07:26 -0000
Received: from 217.145.160.129 by mail (envelope-from
<tgeorgiev@xxxxxxxxx>, uid 89) with qmail-scanner-1.25 (fsecure:
4.61/3215/libra database 2005-01-28/orion database
2005-01-27/avp(2005-01-28). spamassassin: 3.0.2.
Clear:RC:1(217.145.160.129):. Processed in 0.027921 secs); 15 Mar 2005
12:07:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO tg.comm.is-bg.net) (tgeorgiev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
by 0 with SMTP; 15 Mar 2005 12:07:26 -0000
X-Message-Info: o8IIVuzO8A2uVeVaNjPM3ffXAjASDKYuNad8uc7BOqA=
User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1
References: <BAY101-F5BBEDFFDF0EC400DF8F53DD570@xxxxxxx>
Organization: Information Services, PLC
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by sourceforge.net.See
http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.Report problems to
http://sf.net/tracker/?func=add&group_id=1&atid=2000010.0
SF_CHICKENPOX_MINUS BODY: Text interparsed with -0.0
SF_CHICKENPOX_APOSTROPHE BODY: Text interparsed with '0.0 AWL
AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
Errors-To: openh323gk-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-BeenThere: openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9-sf.net
Precedence: bulk
X-Reply-To: tgeorgiev@xxxxxxxxx
List-Unsubscribe:
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openh323gk-users>,<mailto:openh323gk-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <openh323gk-users.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Post: <mailto:openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-Help:
<mailto:openh323gk-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openh323gk-users>,<mailto:openh323gk-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive:
<http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=openh323gk-users>
Return-Path: openh323gk-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Mar 2005 12:09:09.0093 (UTC)
FILETIME=[CAC81150:01C52957]
On Tuesday 15 March 2005 13:01, hamed akhavan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Appears the problem with the large number of concurrent calls on the
system
> has been resolved! however the disconnect cause 4 is still there!
>
> I understand that this disconnect cause is generated from the terminting
> ISDN equipment, however this error only appears when the call is
crossing
> this GK, if i send the call directly to the terminating GW we never see
> disconnect cause 4! but as soon as the gnugk is involved i see
disconnect
> cause 4 passed back to to main GK that sent LRQ to the gnugk!
I completely understand that this happens only if the call is passed via
GnuGK. The issue is to understand WHY... And the answer can be given via a
debug at the ISDN switch that issues the DC No 4.
>
> one other strange thing is that in the mysql cdr logs, we also dont see
> disconnect cause 4! so what is the main GK that sent the LRQ is seeing
the
> causes as "4"? could this be a problem at the main GK such as
> mis-interpreting the code which is highly unlikely! or a communication
> problem between the two?
>
Maybe I will sound funny, but why don't you try a "direct H225 connection"
between the two gatekeepers (also called in GnuGK - "Permanent Endpoint")?
Just as a test.
-------------------------------------------------------
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://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________________
List: Openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549
Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/
-------------------------------------------------------
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://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________________
List: Openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549
Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/
