Topic: problems with 2.2.4-5X releases and Zaptel

[PWDasterisk]

I've had many odd issues with Zaptel since jumping from 2.2.4-32 to the newer point releases and finally regressed back to 2.2.4-32... the most notable is that the 2.2.4-54 release in particular calls DAHDI as the technology for internal Zaptel FXS hardware so fails... example AGI Debug for Sail-2.2.4-54, Asterisk-1.4.21.1, and zaptel-1.4.12.1 compiled from source on the 2.6.9-89.31.1 kernel for X1200 Polycom calling x1100 Zaptel FXS station:

-- Executing [1100@qrxvtmny:1] AGI("SIP/1200-b7d9ecb0", "selintra|InCall|") in new stack
    -- Launched AGI Script /var/lib/asterisk/agi-bin/selintra
AGI Tx >> agi_request: selintra
AGI Tx >> agi_channel: SIP/1200-b7d9ecb0
AGI Tx >> agi_type: SIP
...
AGI Tx >> agi_dnid: 1100
AGI Tx >> agi_extension: 1100
...
AGI Rx << EXEC Dial DAHDI/4|20|ktT
    -- AGI Script Executing Application: (Dial) Options: (DAHDI/4|20|ktT)
[Jun  8 14:16:43] WARNING[16427]: channel.c:3025 ast_request: No channel type registered for 'DAHDI'
[Jun  8 14:16:43] WARNING[16427]: app_dial.c:1183 dial_exec_full: Unable to create channel of type 'DAHDI' (cause 66 - Channel not implemented)
  == Everyone is busy/congested at this time (1:0/0/1)

NOTE: other functions like Call Groups and Inbound routing work fine calling Zaptel FXS hardware.

Additionally since moving to the newer releases the Zaptel hardware would periodically cease to function on a Reconfigure or Reboot and I've had to reinstall Zaptel and do a PCI Telephony Cards =>Initialize =>Commit then Power down and reboot to get it functioning again... after having to do this half a dozen times it was simpler to just regress than to troubleshoot.

Any one else using Zaptel with the newer point releases have similar issues?

[SARK devs]

Thanks for this

I will check -54 to see if we can replicate the issue here.

Kind Regards

S

[David Harper]

I can confirm this bug in 2.2.4-54.

[SARK devs]

Hi David

I think the best thing to do is move up to the last of the 2.x releases (2.6.1) or move forward to 3.1. The fxs pathways are not well tested in 2.x because they were rarely used in the customer base.   3.x is better in this respect and it does support custom channel definitions so you can build your own dial statements.

Kind Regards

S