[Asterisk-Users] AArgh, * and the 7960

[Brian Cuthie]

You know, I'm not so sure this is limited to chan_capi. I have two 
asterisk boxes running, with one connected to my PSTN gateway (also 
using Asterisk).  1.0 stable works fine with my Cisco phone. CVS head 
works if I comment out the offending lines. Without commenting them out, 
the cisco phones drop packets like crazy. No chan_api is involved.

And as far as 'fixing' it goes, I would love to. I'm not without the 
skill. But, while Asterisk is almost unbelievable in its features set, 
some of the code is damn hard to grok. Some source files have as many as 
8000 lines with virtually *no* comments. I don't think I've seen a 
single function with a preamble describing what it does, or how it works.

And I don't mean any offense by this. As I said, Asterisk is a truly 
amazing piece of software. But if the original developers, who really 
know how this stuff works, could put some effort into documenting the 
code with some comments, their efforts will pay off ten-fold when others 
are able to start helping them maintain it.

Cheers,

-brian

brian k. west wrote:

>Also on a side note if Kapejod isn't wanting keep chan_capi up to date then
>someone needs to ask him if he will disclaim it so digium can include it and
>help maintain it.
>
>bkw
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "brian k. west" <brian at bkw.org>
>To: <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 8:01 PM
>Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] AArgh, * and the 7960
>
>
>  
>
>>>I'd love to fix the problem, but no-one is listening!
>>>
>>>I did what you said, captured Ethereal traces, found that timestamps do
>>>not increment, found BLATANT errors in rtp.c where a signed int is being
>>>used to hold return values from an unsigned int function...  and had my
>>>bug report thrown out because I am only able to reproduce the problem
>>>      
>>>
>with
>  
>
>>>chan_capi.
>>>      
>>>
>>The problem isn't with asterisk chan_capi will have to be updated to deal
>>with the changes.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Now I know that chan_capi doesn't belong to Digium, and I know that
>>>      
>>>
>you're
>  
>
>>>all trying to get a 1.0 release out.  But this problem is really hurting
>>>my business, and right now destroying any chance that I might start
>>>offering Asterisk as part of commercial solutions.
>>>      
>>>
>>I don't see these issues in any other channel driver.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Now, kapejod is not replying to my e-mails, and markster's suggestion
>>>(from another bug report) of zeroing out the delivery field in
>>>      
>>>
>chan_capi's
>  
>
>>>read function did not work.  So hacking is all I have left if I want to
>>>keep using Asterisk -- which I do, because I think it's a great program
>>>with a pretty good community around it.
>>>      
>>>
>>Where are you ethereal traces so I can look over them.
>>
>>bkw
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>  
>