[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] 3657: when using FEC, asterisk considers negative sequence numbers as missing

[Torrey Searle]

> On June 20, 2014, 8:03 a.m., wdoekes wrote:
> > You may want to attach an actual diff to this review, so we have something to look at ;)

Thanks (first review board post)... It asked for the diff as a pre-condition for creating a review board request... strange that it didn't decide to include it :-P


- Torrey


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3657/#review12249
-----------------------------------------------------------


On June 20, 2014, 8:47 a.m., Torrey Searle wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3657/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 20, 2014, 8:47 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Bugs: ASTERISK-23908
>     https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-23908
> 
> 
> Repository: Asterisk
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> When using FEC error correction with span=3 and entries=4 asterisk will try to repair in packet with sequence number 5 because it will see that packet -4 is missing. The result is that Asterisk will forward garbage packets that can possibly kill the fax.
> 
> This patch adds a check to see if the sequence number is valid before checking if the packet is missing
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   trunk/main/udptl.c 416335 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3657/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Replayed the T.38 FEC callflow using a version of SIPP patched to understand m=image for pcapplay
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Torrey Searle
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20140620/2a639a1f/attachment.html>