<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2011/12/10 giovanni.v <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:iax@keybits.org">iax@keybits.org</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Il 10/12/2011 8.03, Olivier ha scritto:<div class="im"><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Yes, assuming no hardware/configuration problems this shouldn't happen<br>
> on PTP.<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
</div><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Can you explain why taking down layer 1 on idling spans happens on<br>
PtmP and can't happen on PTP ?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Where possible worse than my English: </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">"ne devrait pas arriver", "généralement pas utilisés".<br>
</blockquote><div> <br>In french, everything becomes crystal clear, isn't it ? ;-)))))))))<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Ok, i'd like to be sure my statement above will never misunderstood. I wanted to say that L1 deactivation in PTP provisioning is not commonly used.<br>
However, nothing prevents the telco to do so because (ETSI*) specifications allow it. The ETSI L1 specification says that "The choice to eventually deactivate is up to higher layers at the network side." without any distinction between PTP or PTMP.<br>
<br>
I believe that the L1 deactivation in PTP is not commonly used for the sake of convenience:<br>
- PTP lines are usually provisioned for a pbx using a basic NT (no a/b ports, less power). A pbx doesn't drain power from the network so there is little to save.<br>
- PTP lines are also provisioned to share a single number or DDI spans to multiple BRI. The result of permanent L1 and a fixed TEI is a faster response from the user side, that is convenient on the network side to find and allocate a resource on incoming calls.<br>
<br>
* ETS 300 012-1: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/bwycqcz" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/bwycqcz</a><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br></div></div></blockquote><div><br>Thank you very much for this lengthy and very valuable explaination.<br>
<br>Comparing PTP and PTMP logs, I saw the former didn't include those lines meaning the trunk is loosing its sync but I didn't know where it came from (asking this kind of question to a Telco is like asking secret services to list the names and addresses of their field agents ...).<br>
<br>Having Asterisk, Dahdi or whatever to support this BRI economy mode would perfect (I would be pleased to contribute to a bounty targeting this feature) but until this happens, switching to PTP seems the best option.<br>
<br>Tanks again for taking time to provide this input.<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">
<br>
--<br>
______________________________<u></u>______________________________<u></u>_________<br>
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a href="http://www.api-digital.com" target="_blank">http://www.api-digital.com</a> --<br>
New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs:<br>
<a href="http://www.asterisk.org/hello" target="_blank">http://www.asterisk.org/hello</a><br>
<br>
asterisk-users mailing list<br>
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:<br>
<a href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users" target="_blank">http://lists.digium.com/<u></u>mailman/listinfo/asterisk-<u></u>users</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>