[Home]

Summary:ASTERISK-04210: [Feature request] Can chan_iax pass back fault specific PRI cause codes when network errors occur?
Reporter:kb1_kanobe2 (kb1_kanobe2)Labels:
Date Opened:2005-05-17 18:37:08Date Closed:2011-06-07 14:04:40
Priority:MajorRegression?No
Status:Closed/CompleteComponents:Core/General
Versions:Frequency of
Occurrence
Related
Issues:
Environment:Attachments:
Description:Consider, two (or more) * servers are passing PRI traffic back and forth over an IAX connection. Somewhere in between the network fails for an extended period. chan_iax barfs with something along the lines of:

May 17 15:09:33 WARNING[21978] chan_iax2.c: Max retries exceeded to host 10.255.40.1 on IAX2/astpbx-wharfrd-incoming@astpbx-pstn-16385 (type = 6, subclass = 11, ts=1410343, seqno=170)

Followed by channel.c dismantling the call that was using that circuit:

May 17 15:09:33 DEBUG[3002] channel.c: Didn't get a frame from channel: IAX2/astpbx-wharfrd-incoming@astpbx-pstn-16385
May 17 15:09:33 DEBUG[3002] channel.c: Bridge stops bridging channels IAX2/astpbx-wharfrd-incoming@astpbx-pstn-16385 and Zap/1-1

However, from the perspective of the device on the other side of the local zaptel interface, we just see a Hangup request with 'Normal Clearing' cause codes.

Is is feasible/practical to have code 38 (Network out of order) or code 41 (Temporary failure) passed out of the PRI instead?


****** ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ******

I've been having an internetworking problem and people are getting ticket with 'normal clearing' because they've been trained that this means 'there was no problem - the other party hung up'.

'Temporary failure' or such would help foster a better understanding.
Comments:By: Michael Jerris (mikej) 2005-05-25 20:33:40

No activity on this request.  Please create a patch, contract with somone to do so, or place a bounty on the wiki.  This bug can be re-opened when a patch is ready.