From owner-freebsd-isdn Thu Sep 3 02:33:51 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA18992 for freebsd-isdn-outgoing; Thu, 3 Sep 1998 02:33:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mail.ppp.net (mail.ppp.net [194.64.12.35]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA18981 for ; Thu, 3 Sep 1998 02:33:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ernie!bert.kts.org!hm@ppp.net) Received: from casparc.ppp.net (casparc2.ppp.net [194.64.12.42]) by mail.ppp.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA10069; Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:32:02 +0200 Received: from ernie by casparc.ppp.net with uucp (Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0zEVkH-002ZjZC; Thu, 3 Sep 98 11:32 MET DST Received: from bert.kts.org(really [194.55.156.2]) by ernie.kts.org via sendmail with smtp id for ; Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:10:30 +0200 (CEST) (Smail-3.2.0.91 1997-Jan-14 #3 built 1998-Feb-14) Received: by bert.kts.org via sendmail with stdio id for freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:10:29 +0200 (CEST) (Smail-3.2.0.94 1997-Apr-22 #2 built 1998-Aug-25) Message-Id: From: hm@kts.org (Hellmuth Michaelis) Subject: Re: called-back, rejects and auto hangup In-Reply-To: <19980902220352.22500@wau.mis.ah.nl> from Leo Weppelman at "Sep 2, 98 10:03:52 pm" To: leo@wau.mis.ah.nl (Leo Weppelman) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:10:29 +0200 (CEST) Cc: freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.ORG Organization: Kitchen Table Systems Reply-To: hm@kts.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL40 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org 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) I think Gary said it already: the remote calls back almost immediately; long before the local call to the remote is disconnected - this can be seen from the traces you sent me in private mail. This situation is not being handled by isdnd due to internal design limitations - changing this will be a major undertaking. The only help for this situation is, to delay the callback from the remote for a time it takes to disconnect the local to the remote. If the remote were a i4b machine, i'd say "increase the callbackwait entry parameter for this call to the time it takes to disconnect the local out- going call". I'm quite shure (this was a Linux machine IIRC) that i4l has something similar to tune the delay time; this it the knob to tune for this situation. hellmuth -- Hellmuth Michaelis hm@kts.org Hamburg, Europe A duck is like a bicycle because they both have two wheels except the duck (terry@cs.weber.edu) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isdn" in the body of the message