| 00:16.28 | *** join/#asterisk-dev infobot (ibot@c-174-52-60-165.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 00:16.28 | *** topic/#asterisk-dev is Take the March 2019 Asterisk User Survey! https://goo.gl/forms/xL1VUHRsf95saly13 -- Asterisk Development Discussion -=- http://www.asterisk.org/developers -=- Tier 2 and 3.14159265 support is in #asterisk -=- Check out our blog! blogs.asterisk.org -=- Follow on Twitter at @AsteriskDev |
| 00:43.40 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 00:54.31 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 01:14.05 | *** join/#asterisk-dev andrewyager (~andrewyag@syd02s26-fw01.thecore.net.au) |
| 01:23.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev spatel (~spatel@pool-98-118-124-216.bstnma.fios.verizon.net) |
| 02:55.58 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 04:56.53 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 05:07.36 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 06:19.13 | *** join/#asterisk-dev pchero_work (~pchero@87.213.247.82) |
| 06:39.35 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 07:27.25 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 07:28.37 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 07:59.12 | *** join/#asterisk-dev hehol (~hehol@gatekeeper.loca.net) |
| 08:15.46 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 08:21.45 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 08:45.31 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 08:54.42 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 09:05.35 | *** join/#asterisk-dev jkroon (~jkroon@uls-154-73-32-4.wall.uls.co.za) |
| 09:30.42 | *** join/#asterisk-dev pchero_work (~pchero@87.213.247.82) |
| 10:36.21 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 12:02.55 | *** join/#asterisk-dev pchero_work (~pchero@87.213.247.82) |
| 12:43.48 | *** join/#asterisk-dev spatel (~spatel@pool-98-118-124-216.bstnma.fios.verizon.net) |
| 12:47.30 | *** join/#asterisk-dev pchero_work (~pchero@87.213.247.82) |
| 13:13.59 | *** join/#asterisk-dev scgm11_ (~scgm11@r186-52-98-176.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) |
| 13:14.48 | *** join/#asterisk-dev spatel (~spatel@pool-98-118-124-216.bstnma.fios.verizon.net) |
| 13:16.00 | *** join/#asterisk-dev scgm11_ (~scgm11@r186-52-98-176.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) |
| 13:39.35 | *** join/#asterisk-dev scgm11_ (~scgm11@r186-52-98-176.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) |
| 13:46.21 | *** join/#asterisk-dev scgm11_ (~scgm11@r186-52-98-176.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) |
| 13:48.55 | seanbright | is my suggestion on https://gerrit.asterisk.org/c/asterisk/+/12747 unreasonable? |
| 13:49.34 | seanbright | or because it's chan_unistim do we not really care? |
| 14:00.52 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kharwell (uid358942@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ulsxwovwadxmcycc) |
| 14:00.52 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o kharwell] by ChanServ |
| 14:03.08 | file | I don't think it's unreasonable |
| 14:33.40 | *** join/#asterisk-dev scgm11_ (~scgm11@r186-52-98-176.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) |
| 14:36.20 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 14:37.01 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 15:01.27 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 15:09.40 | seanbright | well that is good enough for me |
| 15:13.29 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 15:24.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 15:30.08 | *** join/#asterisk-dev scgm11_ (~scgm11@r186-52-98-176.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) |
| 15:57.10 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 16:42.23 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 16:56.22 | kharwell | when subscribing to MWI why would Asterisk be sending NOTIFY's with different Call-IDs for the same endpoint/mailbox |
| 16:56.25 | kharwell | here's the scenario ... |
| 16:57.26 | file | if there are multiple subscriptions, or you're still doing unsolicited? |
| 16:58.12 | kharwell | unsolicited NOTIFY is sent out call-id <blah>, subscribe comes in with same call-id <blah>. The unsolicited gets replaced with a solicited, and NOTIFY goes out with same call-id. Unsubscribe works, another NOTIFY goes out for unsub of solicited. Asterisk falls back to unsolicited and now has new call-id |
| 16:58.30 | file | sure |
| 16:58.31 | kharwell | currently should just be the one subscription. |
| 16:58.51 | kharwell | I have endpoint alice with mailboxes=alice@default configured on both endpoint and aor |
| 16:59.14 | file | there is no dialog present on unsolicited, so each one could have a different Call-ID for the NOTIFY |
| 16:59.58 | kharwell | hrm this makes it hard to test with SIPp. |
| 17:00.39 | kharwell | A SIPp scenario tends to only work well with one "call"/Call-ID. Messages received with different call-ids are considered "out of call" |
| 17:01.37 | kharwell | the scenario either errors out, or if you use the -aa option is auto-responds |
| 17:02.22 | kharwell | but using -aa means it "swallows" the notify's with different ids, so no way to really test to see if an unsolicited was received if it has a different id |
| 17:29.12 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 17:48.24 | gtjoseph | you can create a scenario file specifically for out of call messages. |
| 17:48.31 | gtjoseph | kharwell: ^^ |
| 17:48.48 | gtjoseph | then use the -oocsf option |
| 17:53.35 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 17:55.47 | kharwell | was just looking into that. I seem to be getting a number of out of call notify's for some reason. Well more than the expected |
| 18:29.20 | *** join/#asterisk-dev jkroon (~jkroon@165.16.203.109) |
| 19:33.01 | *** join/#asterisk-dev scgm11_ (~scgm11@r186-52-98-176.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) |
| 19:54.29 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 20:03.57 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |
| 20:18.49 | *** join/#asterisk-dev CELYA_ (~Thunderbi@92.184.102.166) |
| 21:22.26 | file | seanbright: I figured something like that would be the cause |
| 21:22.44 | seanbright | well |
| 21:23.06 | seanbright | it would be better to just link against libspeexdsp if it was available |
| 21:23.09 | seanbright | fall back to bundled |
| 21:23.26 | seanbright | not sure why we did it that way to begin with |
| 21:24.14 | file | dunno either, considering we do the configure check already |
| 21:24.40 | seanbright | i assume there were bug fixes that hadn't been released at the time |
| 21:24.54 | seanbright | what is clear is that not many people are up-sampling |
| 21:25.03 | seanbright | because that code is 8 years old |
| 21:25.20 | seanbright | although... i think i've seen other "bad audio when converting from x to y" tickets |
| 21:25.24 | seanbright | <PROTECTED> |
| 21:25.36 | file | 'tis possible |
| 21:42.20 | seanbright | i wonder if you could take advantage of an up-scaling algorithm to create hidden messages in audio |
| 21:43.22 | seanbright | </wonder> |
| 22:04.48 | *** join/#asterisk-dev stevedavies (~stevedavi@197.155.252.3) |