«

On 03/10/09 22:35, Bodincus wrote:
> Dave:
>>
>>
>> "R Johnson" <> wrote in message
>> news:4ac04285$0$2493$...
>>> On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 17:33:15 +0100, Ivor Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 27/09/09 13:25, Dave wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Ivor Jones" <> wrote in message
>>>>> news:...
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>>> My Fritz 7170 will divert PSTN to VoIP and vice versa. Never
>>>>>> needed to
>>>>>> use it though so no idea how well it works.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ivor
>>>>>>
>>>>> Is that box 'better' than a Draytek 2600VG Ivor ?
>>>>
>>>> As I don't know the Draytek I can't really say, but it works well. It
>>>> has 3 FXS ports, 1 FXO port, 4 LAN ports and an ISDN port, as well as a
>>>> USB host port (only 1.1 though unfortunately) plus wireless, so it's
>>>> quite well equipped.
>>>>
>>>> I wrote a review of it here, if you're interested:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.voipon.co.uk/avm-fritzbox...-pri-560.html?
>>> reviews_id=10
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ivor
>>>
>>> I have found the firmware on the Draytek 2600v to be flaky as far as
>>> VoIP
>>> is concerned (and in other places). It's at the point where it works,
>>> but
>>> I don't trust it. Specifically, despite entering the details for SIP
>>> accounts over and over, they refused to register. I checked and checked
>>> settings, in the end I rebooted the router and they registered. I'm sure
>>> the thing has a will of it's own. Randomly I'll get an email to tell
>>> me I
>>> have voicemail, which is pretty good considering the phone has never
>>> even
>>> rung. Never had this kind of agro with my PAP2, but alas I sold that
>>> like
>>> a fool
>>
>> My problem is that I have a Asterisk box and can't use the built-in
>> ATA's as they 'take over' port 5060 inbound so nothing can login from
>> outside, set the port to '0' and everything is ok apart from the ATA's
>> obviously don't work !. Ivor can you use the ATA's on the Fritz if you
>> have a Asterisk box that is ?
>> Dave.
> You can change the SIP port the Fritz works with.
>
> Settings - Telephony - Internet telephony - Advanced Settings.
>
> Tick "Configuring an alternative "source port" for Internet telephony",
> set it to 5062 and you're OK.
>
> The RTP ports (the audio stream) on Fritzes are from 7078 to 7110 UDP,
> set your * box to use other UDP ports for RTP and Bob's your uncle.
>
> A standard * install uses UDP 10000 to 20000 for RTP
> (/etc/asterisk/rtp.conf) so you should be OK with that.
>
> If the Fritz is your router you don't have anything else to do, if you
> have a separate router remember to forward port 5060 and 10000-20000 UDP
> to your * box, and 5062 and 7078-7110 UDP to your Fritz.
>
> Please report success / failure.
>

Hmm, what model Fritz are you using..? My 7170 (Annex A, latest firmware
58.04.76) doesn't have that option in the menu (and yes I do have
"Expert Mode" set to on).

The options I have in "Settings - Telephony - Internet telephony -
Advanced Settings" are (in order):

*Use fixed-line substitute connection

*Location information

*Perform ENUM requests

*Use Voice Activation Detection (VAD)

*Select how to use bandwidth of DSL connection for telephone calls

*Indicate type of service

*Use additional connection for Internet telephony via DSL (PVC)

*Fax transmission also with T.38



Ivor

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 23:35:12 +0000, Gordon Henderson wrote:

> In article <4ac7a230$0$2528$>, R Johnson
> <> wrote:
>>On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 18:54:13 +0000, Gordon Henderson wrote:
>>
>>> In article <4ac04285$0$2493$>, R Johnson
>>> <> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have found the firmware on the Draytek 2600v to be flaky as far as
>>>>VoIP is concerned (and in other places). It's at the point where it
>>>>works, but I don't trust it. Specifically, despite entering the
>>>>details for SIP accounts over and over, they refused to register. I
>>>>checked and checked settings, in the end I rebooted the router and
>>>>they registered. I'm sure the thing has a will of it's own. Randomly
>>>>I'll get an email to tell me I have voicemail, which is pretty good
>>>>considering the phone has never even rung. Never had this kind of agro
>>>>with my PAP2, but alas I sold that like a fool
>>>
>>> Never seen that issue with the 2600v's I've used - have seen other
>>> issues - NAT in particular though. Do you have the latest firmware in
>>> it?
>>>
>>> Gordon
>>
>>The thing is just generally slow, the web interface looks like something
>>a small child did with some crayons - and it's all a bit flaky.
>>
>>I suspect the firmware is 'old' but updating it is a bit of nightmare.
>>
>>Model Name : Vigor2800 series
>>Firmware Version : 2.8.2
>>Build Date/Time : Tue Jun 3 15:26:55.35 2008 ADSL
Firmware Version :
>>E.38.2.23 Annex A
>
> Ah, you said a 2600v yet the model name is 2800 series...
>
> I've never found their web interface to be slow at all - yes, I'm sure
> it could look better, but I don't care about that - it's functional...
>
> Almost sounds like there is actually a fault in it...
>
> Gordon

My apologies 2800 it is. (blush). It's the third one, each being
painfully slow on the web interface and flaky in firmware. Honestly a
nightmare of a device. Also found to be very slow on DSL sync compared to
a throwaway linksys.

I persist with it as it's an 'all in one' that does routed, nat and VOIP.
It does none of these things well, but good enough for now. I would not
have another one - I'd spend more and go with something from Cisco next
time. I kinda think you get what you pay for. The Draytek is kinda cheap
and nasty to me, but I did not want to spend megabuck for a SOHO solution.

Have to say it's great you have had a better time with them. If I had to
describe mine as a woman it would be 'I think it's having an affair'.

Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, R Johnson chose
the tried and tested strategy of:

> I persist with it as it's an 'all in one' that does routed, nat and VOIP.
> It does none of these things well, but good enough for now. I would not
> have another one - I'd spend more and go with something from Cisco next
> time. I kinda think you get what you pay for.

By 'more', you'd be looking at the thick end of three grand for an 1861 + ADSL
card for it, quite a long way from 'getting what you pay for' IMHO.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
21:52:37 up 36 days, 23:39, 8 users, load average: 0.57, 0.42, 0.49
Qua illic est accuso, illic est a vindicatum

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:55:48 +0100, alexd wrote:

> Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, R Johnson
> chose the tried and tested strategy of:
>
>> I persist with it as it's an 'all in one' that does routed, nat and
>> VOIP. It does none of these things well, but good enough for now. I
>> would not have another one - I'd spend more and go with something from
>> Cisco next time. I kinda think you get what you pay for.
>
> By 'more', you'd be looking at the thick end of three grand for an 1861
> + ADSL card for it, quite a long way from 'getting what you pay for'
> IMHO.

Sure, I agree it's a bucked load of money. I just get a bit tired of the
generalisation some people make that 'Draytek are wonderful', when they
are a bit pants to be honest. No offence to anyone intended.

Ivor Jones:
> On 03/10/09 22:35, Bodincus wrote:
>> Dave:
>>>
>>>
>>> "R Johnson" <> wrote in message
>>> news:4ac04285$0$2493$...
>>>> On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 17:33:15 +0100, Ivor Jones wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 27/09/09 13:25, Dave wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Ivor Jones" <> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:...
>>>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>>> My Fritz 7170 will divert PSTN to VoIP and vice versa. Never
>>>>>>> needed to
>>>>>>> use it though so no idea how well it works.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ivor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is that box 'better' than a Draytek 2600VG Ivor ?
>>>>>
>>>>> As I don't know the Draytek I can't really say, but it works well. It
>>>>> has 3 FXS ports, 1 FXO port, 4 LAN ports and an ISDN port, as well
>>>>> as a
>>>>> USB host port (only 1.1 though unfortunately) plus wireless, so it's
>>>>> quite well equipped.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wrote a review of it here, if you're interested:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.voipon.co.uk/avm-fritzbox...-pri-560.html?
>>>> reviews_id=10
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ivor
>>>>
>>>> I have found the firmware on the Draytek 2600v to be flaky as far as
>>>> VoIP
>>>> is concerned (and in other places). It's at the point where it works,
>>>> but
>>>> I don't trust it. Specifically, despite entering the details for SIP
>>>> accounts over and over, they refused to register. I checked and checked
>>>> settings, in the end I rebooted the router and they registered. I'm
>>>> sure
>>>> the thing has a will of it's own. Randomly I'll get an email to tell
>>>> me I
>>>> have voicemail, which is pretty good considering the phone has never
>>>> even
>>>> rung. Never had this kind of agro with my PAP2, but alas I sold that
>>>> like
>>>> a fool
>>>
>>> My problem is that I have a Asterisk box and can't use the built-in
>>> ATA's as they 'take over' port 5060 inbound so nothing can login from
>>> outside, set the port to '0' and everything is ok apart from the ATA's
>>> obviously don't work !. Ivor can you use the ATA's on the Fritz if you
>>> have a Asterisk box that is ?
>>> Dave.
>> You can change the SIP port the Fritz works with.
>>
>> Settings - Telephony - Internet telephony - Advanced Settings.
>>
>> Tick "Configuring an alternative "source port" for Internet telephony",
>> set it to 5062 and you're OK.
>>
>> The RTP ports (the audio stream) on Fritzes are from 7078 to 7110 UDP,
>> set your * box to use other UDP ports for RTP and Bob's your uncle.
>>
>> A standard * install uses UDP 10000 to 20000 for RTP
>> (/etc/asterisk/rtp.conf) so you should be OK with that.
>>
>> If the Fritz is your router you don't have anything else to do, if you
>> have a separate router remember to forward port 5060 and 10000-20000 UDP
>> to your * box, and 5062 and 7078-7110 UDP to your Fritz.
>>
>> Please report success / failure.
>>
>
> Hmm, what model Fritz are you using..? My 7170 (Annex A, latest firmware
> 58.04.76) doesn't have that option in the menu (and yes I do have
> "Expert Mode" set to on).
>
> The options I have in "Settings - Telephony - Internet telephony -
> Advanced Settings" are (in order):
>
> *Use fixed-line substitute connection
>
> *Location information
>
> *Perform ENUM requests
>
> *Use Voice Activation Detection (VAD)
>
> *Select how to use bandwidth of DSL connection for telephone calls
>
> *Indicate type of service
>
> *Use additional connection for Internet telephony via DSL (PVC)
>
> *Fax transmission also with T.38
>
>
>
> Ivor
One of the first incarnations of the family...
FRITZ!Box Fon WLAN Annex A, Firmware version 08.04.49

* Configuring an alternative "source port" for Internet telephony

is between

* Use Voice Activation Detection (VAD)

and

* Select how to use bandwidth of DSL connection for telephone calls

Maybe it's only available when the Fritz is set to be a network client
and not the network router.

--
Bodincus - The Y2K Druid
----------------------------
Law 42 on computing: Anything that could go wron%½ $
$: Access Violation - Core dumped

On 05/10/09 09:24, R Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:55:48 +0100, alexd wrote:
>
>> Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, R Johnson
>> chose the tried and tested strategy of:
>>
>>> I persist with it as it's an 'all in one' that does routed, nat and
>>> VOIP. It does none of these things well, but good enough for now. I
>>> would not have another one - I'd spend more and go with something from
>>> Cisco next time. I kinda think you get what you pay for.
>>
>> By 'more', you'd be looking at the thick end of three grand for an 1861
>> + ADSL card for it, quite a long way from 'getting what you pay for'
>> IMHO.
>
> Sure, I agree it's a bucked load of money. I just get a bit tired of the
> generalisation some people make that 'Draytek are wonderful', when they
> are a bit pants to be honest. No offence to anyone intended.

Cisco kit isn't without its problems either. I have several Wireless
Access Points at work fed by Power Over Ethernet (PoE) which regularly
fall over and don't sync with the mobile units when they come into range.

Ivor

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:41:46 +0100, Ivor Jones wrote:

> On 05/10/09 09:24, R Johnson wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:55:48 +0100, alexd wrote:
>>
>>> Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, R
>>> Johnson chose the tried and tested strategy of:
>>>
>>>> I persist with it as it's an 'all in one' that does routed, nat and
>>>> VOIP. It does none of these things well, but good enough for now. I
>>>> would not have another one - I'd spend more and go with something
>>>> from Cisco next time. I kinda think you get what you pay for.
>>>
>>> By 'more', you'd be looking at the thick end of three grand for an
>>> 1861 + ADSL card for it, quite a long way from 'getting what you pay
>>> for' IMHO.
>>
>> Sure, I agree it's a bucked load of money. I just get a bit tired of
>> the generalisation some people make that 'Draytek are wonderful', when
>> they are a bit pants to be honest. No offence to anyone intended.
>
> Cisco kit isn't without its problems either. I have several Wireless
> Access Points at work fed by Power Over Ethernet (PoE) which regularly
> fall over and don't sync with the mobile units when they come into
> range.
>
> Ivor
I fully understand that. Perhaps I'll put something together with a modem
and a Mini-ITX box running a Linux Server when the time comes. It will
probably be pretty much like a Draytek - because to me, it has the look,
feel and operation of something someone has 'made in their bedroom'.

Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, R Johnson chose
the tried and tested strategy of:

> Perhaps I'll put something together with a modem
> and a Mini-ITX box running a Linux Server when the time comes. It will
> probably be pretty much like a Draytek - because to me, it has the look,
> feel and operation of something someone has 'made in their bedroom'.

Have you actually seen a web interface for any of the *wrt's? Looks far better
than any of the Draytek's I've used. As well as the usual router functions
[DHCP, NAT, ACLs] there's even a module for Asterisk for OpenWRT if you're
scared of using a text editor.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
18:40:15 up 38 days, 20:26, 7 users, load average: 0.42, 0.23, 0.25
Qua illic est accuso, illic est a vindicatum

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:52:53 +0100, alexd wrote:

> Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, R Johnson
> chose the tried and tested strategy of:
>
>> Perhaps I'll put something together with a modem and a Mini-ITX box
>> running a Linux Server when the time comes. It will probably be pretty
>> much like a Draytek - because to me, it has the look, feel and
>> operation of something someone has 'made in their bedroom'.
>
> Have you actually seen a web interface for any of the *wrt's? Looks far
> better than any of the Draytek's I've used. As well as the usual router
> functions [DHCP, NAT, ACLs] there's even a module for Asterisk for
> OpenWRT if you're scared of using a text editor.

It's not just the look. It's the flakiness of the Draytek. I can only
liken it to a bit of a touchy woman

I don't have an issue with *no* gui and Open WRT is something I was going
to look at with a Mini ITX. I don't want to doctor an old Linksys Router,
I'll build something with a bit more grunt - but that's on the back
burner for now.

"R Johnson" <> wrote in message
news:4acb92a0$0$2525$...
> On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:52:53 +0100, alexd wrote:
>
>> Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, R Johnson
>> chose the tried and tested strategy of:
>>
>>> Perhaps I'll put something together with a modem and a Mini-ITX box
>>> running a Linux Server when the time comes. It will probably be pretty
>>> much like a Draytek - because to me, it has the look, feel and
>>> operation of something someone has 'made in their bedroom'.
>>
>> Have you actually seen a web interface for any of the *wrt's? Looks far
>> better than any of the Draytek's I've used. As well as the usual router
>> functions [DHCP, NAT, ACLs] there's even a module for Asterisk for
>> OpenWRT if you're scared of using a text editor.
>
> It's not just the look. It's the flakiness of the Draytek. I can only
> liken it to a bit of a touchy woman
>
> I don't have an issue with *no* gui and Open WRT is something I was going
> to look at with a Mini ITX. I don't want to doctor an old Linksys Router,
> I'll build something with a bit more grunt - but that's on the back
> burner for now.

To quote an old IT expression GUIs are for WIMPs

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%