[asterisk-dev] IAX hardphone

Bill Shaw b.shaw at comcast.net
Mon Feb 14 10:42:11 CST 2011

On 2/14/2011 11:33 AM, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> On 02/14/2011 09:56 AM, Bill Shaw wrote:
>> On 2/12/2011 9:25 AM, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
>>> On 02/11/2011 03:35 PM, Bill Shaw wrote:
>>>> I'm seeing some information elements in my data that are not 
>>>> defined in
>>>> the RFC and Wireshark doesn't know - 0x37 & 0x38. Is there an updated
>>>> list of ies available somewhere?
>>>> Also, I'm wondering if my 'accept' issue is because I'm not
>>>> authenticating first. I should be able to just 'accept' the 'new'
>>>> without authenticating, shouldn't I?
>>> If you are the receiver of the NEW request, you are not going to
>>> 'authenticate' at all, although you could choose to require the sender
>>> of the NEW to authenticate *to* you. Whether you do or not should not
>>> affect the remainder of the call.
>>> Are you not seeing *any* logging on the Asterisk console (with maximum
>>> verbosity and debug levels, and 'iax2 debug on') when your ACCEPT is
>>> sent to it?
>> Entering 'iax2 debug on' at the command line gets a "no such command'
>> response.
> Well, that was a shot in the dark because you haven't really given us 
> much basic information... like the version of Asterisk you are using, 
> for example.
> Let's start with that... tell us what version you are using, and we'll 
> be able to tell you how to maximize the amount of debugging 
> information emitted to your console, so you can get some clue as to 
> what is happening.
> As far as the comment about the source being protocol documentation: 
> that is *not* your issue. I was referring to the addition of new 
> information elements in my response, which should be documented before 
> they are added to a release of Asterisk (in my opinion, at least). 
> However, even if they are not, addition of new information elements 
> would never make Asterisk non-backwards-compatible with any existing 
> IAX2 implementation (except in rare cases, which are always fully 
> documented), and any proper implementation should be able to cope with 
> receiving (and ignoring) information elements it does not understand.

Sorry for the lack of information, Kevin.  let me back up to my original 
post and bring that info forward....

OK.  First,  my setup... - my development system - Win xp - Wireshark, Zoiper, TI's 
Code Composer Studio - My PBX - CentOS 5.5, Asterisk 1.6 - my hardphone - TI DSP running my code on the bare metal

Zoiper calls extension 21 which is mapped in the dial plan through to my 
hardphone.  Linux arps for my mac,  I reply with it.  * sends me a 
'new',  I reply with an 'accept'.  There is no response to the 
'accept'.  It just gets ignored and eventually * sends me another 
'new'.  There's got to be something wrong with my 'accept' but I just 
can't see it.  Wireshark shows it as I expect.  No error messages,  
nothing in the messages log,  it just gets dropped.

Captureof the 'accept' from Wireshark:

Thanks again,


More information about the asterisk-dev mailing list