[Asterisk-Users] PLEASE HELP: X100P/Caller ID: clidtest works, * complains [banging head]

[Jon Whitear]

>Hi,
>
>I'm running Asterisk 1.0.8 on Gentoo, with an X100P (clone) card, and I'm
>having problems with Caller ID. I have run clidtest, and it seems happy
>enough, returning:-
>
>server clidtest # ./clidtest /dev/zap/1
>Number: 0412222222, Name: MOBILE
>
>(that number's fake.) However, I'm not getting the caller ID passed
>through with *. Sometimes I get a "failed checksum" like this:-
>
>    -- Starting simple switch on 'Zap/1-1'
>Jul 30 16:06:14 NOTICE[9597]: callerid.c:306 callerid_feed: Caller*ID
>failed checksum
>Jul 30 16:06:15 NOTICE[9597]: chan_zap.c:5405 ss_thread: Got event 2
>(Ring/Answered)...
>Jul 30 16:06:16 NOTICE[9597]: chan_zap.c:5405 ss_thread: Got event 2
>(Ring/Answered)...
>Jul 30 16:06:18 NOTICE[9597]: chan_zap.c:5405 ss_thread: Got event 2
>(Ring/Answered)...
>    -- Executing Wait("Zap/1-1", "2") in new stack
><snip>
>
>and sometimes I get an error that I _really_ don't understand:-
>
>    -- Starting simple switch on 'Zap/1-1'
>Jul 30 16:25:02 NOTICE[9616]: chan_zap.c:5405 ss_thread: Got event 2
>(Ring/Answered)...
>Jul 30 16:25:02 NOTICE[9616]: chan_zap.c:5405 ss_thread: Got event 2
>(Ring/Answered)...
>Jul 30 16:25:04 ERROR[9616]: callerid.c:260 callerid_feed: fsk_serie
>made mylen < 0 (-62)
>Jul 30 16:25:04 WARNING[9616]: chan_zap.c:5434 ss_thread: CallerID feed
>failed: Success
>Jul 30 16:25:04 WARNING[9616]: chan_zap.c:5476 ss_thread: CallerID
>returned with error on channel 'Zap/1-1'
><snip>
>
>This seems to be a common topic in the archives! I have tried adjusting
>the gain to no avail. This is a Telstra (Australia) CLID service, and I
>have ADSL on the same line (a line filter is installed.) The fact that
>clidtest works suggests that the card's getting the CLID fine, but
>there's a problem after that.
>
>Sorry for the repeat post - I managed to post the original during the
>recent list 'blackout', so I guess it didn't get to many people.
>
>Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Jon
>  
>

I still haven't found a solution to this - is it possible to disable the 
checksum code and see what comes through? I've had a look at that piece 
of code, but I'm no coder, so I don't know how I'd do it. As I said 
before, this seems to be a common topic on this list, but there are 
rarely any answers to the problems.

Cheers,

Jon