[Asterisk-Users] RE: Caller ID

[Kevin Walsh]

Steve Underwood [steveu at coppice.org] wrote:
> Wake up.
>
Sorry, I must have drifted off for a while.  Thanks for the alarm
call.

> 
> The reversal detection is a complete waste of time. Totally unnecessary.
> Pointless. A line break detector would have much more use, as it would
> give a reliable disconnect detection on many lines. (Actually, reversal
> detection would have years ago, but its not much use any more).
>
Perhaps both would be good then:  A polarity reversal detector for
determining the start of a Caller*ID sequence and a line break detector
for, err, detecting line breaks.  Actually, my X101P seems to detect
hangups just fine, so I've not had cause to check whether the detection
is done in the hardware or in the driver.  If you say that it's not done
in hardware then I'll take your word for it for the moment.

> 
> All you need for these CLI requirements is to monitor for some energy on
> the line. Since these FXOs are not being used in banks of hundreds, you
> will never notice this MIPs this uses.
> 
I'd still prefer to see this done in hardware, rather than in some sort
of idle loop in the driver or the application.  Call me old fashioned,
but I prefer it when unnecessary overheads are not measured in MIPs. :-)

Perhaps the new FXO module for the TDMxxB has, or will have, hardware
support for the above.  If it has, and I'm sure I heard somewhere that
it does, then that's great.  An X102P, with similar support, would no
doubt be welcome too.

-- 
   _/   _/  _/_/_/_/  _/    _/  _/_/_/  _/    _/
  _/_/_/   _/_/      _/    _/    _/    _/_/  _/   K e v i n   W a l s h
 _/ _/    _/          _/ _/     _/    _/  _/_/    kevin at cursor.biz
_/   _/  _/_/_/_/      _/    _/_/_/  _/    _/