Summary:	ASTERISK-04134: [patch] New H323 channel driver for asterisk using ooh323c
Reporter:	Vishal Phirke (vphirke)	Labels:
Date Opened:	2005-05-10 20:20:31	Date Closed:	2005-07-12 18:06:59
Priority:	Major	Regression?	No
Status:	Closed/Complete	Components:	Core/General
Versions:		Frequency of Occurrence
Related Issues:
Environment:		Attachments:
Description:	This is 0.1 version of new H323 driver for asterisk. This driver uses an open source H.323 stack developed by Objective Systems in C(www.obj-sys.com/open). The driver currently supports ulaw and gsm along with rfc2833 dtmf. Basic call setup and tear down has been tested. We are looking for help in testing and finding bugs. Also, new feature suggestions from experts will be helpful in taking the driver to a next level. You can download the driver at http://www.obj-sys.com/open/asterisk-ooh323c-0.1.tar.gz
Comments:	By: Brian West (bkw918) 2005-05-11 08:37:36 Keep up the good work guys.  Even if you get alot of negative bitter comments from some select few in the community. /b By: Vishal Phirke (vphirke) 2005-05-11 17:00:36 Fixed bug and updated package is available at the same link provided above. Bug Details: Test call ph1(gsm only) -> * ->ph2(ulaw only) was failing.             Fixed it to take advantage of transcoding supported by asterisk and             should work now. By: Tony Mountifield (softins) 2005-05-12 01:47:39 I would be interested in trying this driver out with alaw instead of ulaw (I'm in the UK). Reading through the code, it appears that alaw is already supported in most places, except for ooh323c_set_capability() in ooh323cDriver.c. Is that correct? By: Vishal Phirke (vphirke) 2005-05-12 09:33:43 softins:You are right. alaw will work if you modify ooh323c_set_capability(..) and ooh323c_set_capability_for_call(...) following the pattern. I tested it just now and it works.Will be supported in next release but I guess you can carry on your testing with the changes. Let me know if you face any problems. By: warp (warp) 2005-05-13 03:36:24 And how affairs with g729/g723 are? By: wgfreewill (wgfreewill) 2005-05-13 13:53:17 Is this going to replace JerJer's implementation as the Digium production stable code, the one that digium includes in the asterisk package, or will it remain a separate project (like oh323). I would like to know which code I should dedicate resources to. By: wgfreewill (wgfreewill) 2005-05-17 10:24:02 Right now, you will have to specify the binding address. It would be nice to see a driver that binds to all interfaces on a machine so multi-homes machines work correctly. By: Vishal Phirke (vphirke) 2005-05-23 17:35:38 Warp:asterisk-ooh323c now supports ulaw/alaw/gsm/g729a/g7231. The updated code is in cvs under asterisk-addons. By: Paul Cadach (pcadach) 2005-05-23 20:20:51 Heh! What about next: int encodeBitsFromOctet (OOCTXT* pctxt, ASN1OCTET value, ASN1UINT nbits) { ...   ASN1OCTET mask; ...   if (nbits < 8) {      switch (nbits) { ...      }      value &= mask;   } ... There isn't case for 0 bits, and mask variable isn't get initialized at function entrance. The same case for encodebitsFromOctet()... By: warp (warp) 2005-05-25 07:34:15 No sound. I try make call from my Cisco 2611XM (IOS  Version 12.2(15)T8 ) to Asterisk BOX (demo extension) established,  but no sound  and call dropped after 5-10 seconds on any codecs. From OpenPhone all great. By: Vishal Phirke (vphirke) 2005-05-25 10:04:50 warp:Can you send your /var/log/asterisk/h323_log file for the failed call to "support at obj-sys dot com" By: mochouinard (mochouinard) 2005-06-02 23:01:06 I can't seem to be beable to make call from a Polycom SoundStation IP 3000.  All I get is an attempt to dial the default context extention s.  Then after the call drop. 22:59:15:717  Warn:RemoteEndpoint closed connection (incoming, ooh323c_5) 22:59:15:717  Cleaning Call (incoming, ooh323c_5)- reason:OO_REASON_TRANSPORTFAILURE 22:59:15:717  Closing H.245 connection (incoming, ooh323c_5) 22:59:15:717  Removed call (incoming, ooh323c_5) from list By: Michael Jerris (mikej) 2005-06-23 15:42:38 Is there a reason this bug is still open as this has been commited to addons and there have been no reports of issues for 3 weeks? By: Vishal Phirke (vphirke) 2005-06-23 16:37:48 MikeJ:There were fixes done for this. But haven't yet heard from the bug reporter and hence the bug hasn't been updated. By: Michael Jerris (mikej) 2005-07-12 17:12:39 it appears no one is responding, so once again, any reason to keep open at this point? By: Kevin P. Fleming (kpfleming) 2005-07-12 18:05:52 No, this can be closed. Individual problem reports can be opened if needed.