[asterisk-users] Acceptance testing of a new PRI

[Steve Totaro]

On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Tzafrir Cohen <tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 03:46:28PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 10:38:07PM +0300, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>> [ quoting me ]
>>
>> > > Chanunavail/Congestion.
>> > >
>> > > Here, let me go get the exact message...
>> > >
>> > > ==============8<========================8<============================
>> > >     -- Executing AGI("SIP/101cathy-b7619990", "call_log.agi|880116142154432")
>> > > in new stack
>> > >     -- Launched AGI Script /var/lib/asterisk/agi-bin/call_log.agi
>> > > +++++ CALL LOG START : |1216995262.36|SIP/101cathy-b7619990|880116142154432|SIP|
>> > > 7274514974|2008-07-25 10:14:22
>> > >     -- AGI Script call_log.agi completed, returning 0
>> > >     -- Executing Dial("SIP/101cathy-b7619990", "Zap/01-1/16142154432|30|o") in
>> > >  new stack
>> >
>> > Why do you keep adding that -1?
>>
>> Because, as I noted in my other message, *ASTERISK KEEPS ADDING IT*.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> > Try Zap/01
>> >
>> > Though I tried originating a call to Zap/04 and Zap/04-1 and both worked
>> > well here (1.4). With the "-1" I got the warning I mentioned above about
>> > the unknown option.
>>
>> Sure.  But did *the call go out*?
>>
>> > > Jul 25 10:14:22 NOTICE[25497]: app_dial.c:1076 dial_exec_full: Unable to create
>> > > channel of type 'Zap' (cause 0 - Unknown)
>> > >   == Everyone is busy/congested at this time (1:0/0/1)
>> > >     -- Executing NoOp("SIP/101cathy-b7619990", "CHANUNAVAIL") in new stack
>> > >     -- Executing NoOp("SIP/101cathy-b7619990", "Hangup Cause: 0") in new stack
>> > >     -- Executing Hangup("SIP/101cathy-b7619990", "") in new stack
>> > >   == Spawn extension (default, 880116142154432, 5) exited non-zero on 'SIP/101
>> > > cathy-b7619990'
>> > > ==============8<========================8<============================
>> > >
>> > > Copied and pasted.  I later extended the rules, as you saw, to have a
>> > > special rule for 880X, and it worked just fine.
>> > >
>> > > Not sure what to tell you, but it seems to be that.
>> > >
>> > > Note that I have not *yet* taken the "-1" off the end, so it cannot be
>> > > that.
>>
>> See?  I *knew* I mentioned it.
>>
>> Note that Mike Cargile at VICIdial looked over that dialplan, and he
>> didn't seem to have a problem with the -1; I'm pretty sure it's in the
>> VICIdial standard dialplans.
>
> You can replace the '-1' with 'X56456456', '_123123' or 'p0'. It would
> be likewise (in)valid, give a warning regarding "invalid option" but
> dial anyway.
>
> --
>               Tzafrir Cohen
> icq#16849755              jabber:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
> +972-50-7952406           mailto:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
> http://www.xorcom.com  iax:guest at local.xorcom.com/tzafrir
>

If you want to test inbound and fill all of your channels, you could
post something creative on Craigslist and then put them all in a queue
with MOH that would keep them on the line.

Or you could make a dialplan that takes the inbound caller ID and turn
around and dial it.  Do that with one of your DIDs and you should fill
all your channels pretty quickly.

Anyways, with a PRI, when I see the channels come up and I can dial
out and in, I have never had an issue with a particular channel.

Thanks,
Steve Totaro