Summary:ASTERISK-14271: [patch] BRI Network side PTMP mode. Support USA NI1 protocol.
Reporter:Dmitry Dudkin (ddv2005)Labels:
Date Opened:2010-01-12 10:57:07.000-0600Date Closed:2011-06-07 14:00:44
Versions:Frequency of
Environment:Attachments:( 0) dahdi.patch
( 1) libpri_new.patch
Description:I have implemented BRI_NET_PTMP mode. Now it support USA BRI NI1 protocol. To setup SPID for each line use line1_spid/line2_spid parameters in chan_dahdi.conf. Default values is '1' for line1_spid and '2' for line2_spid.
Comments:By: Leif Madsen (lmadsen) 2010-01-12 11:08:02.000-0600

Please note that new features must be made against trunk as that is where they will eventually be merged.

By: Dmitry Dudkin (ddv2005) 2010-01-12 11:08:35.000-0600

Please remove libpri.patch and rename libpri_new.patch to libpri.patch

By: Dmitry Dudkin (ddv2005) 2010-01-12 11:09:59.000-0600

OK. I will get new trunk and patch it.

By: Leif Madsen (lmadsen) 2010-01-12 11:22:38.000-0600

There is no ability to rename the patches, so you're better off just adding an incrementing number to any new patches you provide.


By: Dmitry Dudkin (ddv2005) 2010-01-12 11:36:07.000-0600

I see a lot of very significant changes in the trunk version of libpri. I think that would be better to wait until all these changes will be finished and released. And then I'll add my changes to the trunk version.

By: Leif Madsen (lmadsen) 2010-01-12 12:04:41.000-0600

I should note that any changes to chan_dadhi should be to trunk (http://svn.asterisk.org/svn/asterisk/trunk) but that libpri's latest changes are in the 1.4 branch:  http://svn.asterisk.org/svn/libpri/branches/1.4

The libpri trunk is basically way behind and the whole thing should really be fixed up so that trunk is actually trunk in that branch :)

Hope that clears it up!

By: Leif Madsen (lmadsen) 2010-03-23 09:53:39

Confirming this issue. Is the reporter still interested in moving this issue forward?

By: Leif Madsen (lmadsen) 2010-06-10 10:13:09

Requesting feedback from the reporter.

By: Paul Belanger (pabelanger) 2010-06-18 10:07:04


By: Dmitry Dudkin (ddv2005) 2010-06-18 10:16:29

Yes I still interested. But 1.4 branch have so much significant changes that incompatible with my implementation. The new version did not bring anything new for me but required to do my work from scratch. And now I don't have time to do it because I am happy with old version. Anyone who needs this feature can use version 1.2 with my changes and he does not lose anything.

By: Leif Madsen (lmadsen) 2010-06-23 14:27:55

Suspending this issue per comments from the reporter.