 | reply to conitssap
Re: [Voip.ms] Cant answer incoming calls said by conitssap: we now know that the ATAs are to blame
:) |
|
 | reply to conitssap I had the same problem on the same provider: every so often answer incoming calls, silence to me, ringing to caller.
Tried two ATAs: a PAP2T and a SPA112. Tried 2 routers: a WRT54GL and WL-520GU. Played with firmware, servers, and registration/NAT parameters in the ATA/router. Spent an insane amount of time on it, with no joy.
I really wanted to stay put but finally gave up and moved on. In the last 8 months using callcentric and anveo on the same equipment, have not seen the problem. Don't know what was at fault, but just saying. |
|
 | Your situation is the exactly the same as what I have been going through for the last month - im going to test it with another ISP just to give it one last kick at the can. I dont expect any different though |
|
 | Maybe it's the phone handset? Have you tried a different one plugged directly into the ATA? |
|
|
|
 | Sometimes you overlook the obvious Im using a Panasonic cordless phone. I will try it with a standard wired handset and see if that helps. |
|
 | reply to Springbok didnt work with a direct line plugged in - it actually got worse - took me 10 tries to get an answer while the cordless would take 2-3. changed the phone cord and that did not help either. not sure why it would get worse though - changed impedance and Ren setting but that did not make a difference. |
|
 | Here's my ATA settings with voip.ms and although I dont use the analog phones much these days, it's always working when I try them:
PAP2T Firmware Version: 5.1.6(LS) NAT Keep Alive Intvl: 15 seconds Ring Waveform: Sinusoid Ring Voltage: 90 Ring Frequency: 20 Register Expires: 60
I also remember being advised to use the hard IP address of my voip.ms POP and not the DNS name on this ATA (dont remember the reason). |
|
 | reply to conitssap had a load of problems getting incoming calls with voip.ms, I think it is just their system, so I just use them for outgoing only which has been pretty good |
|
 | said by Dave2 :had a load of problems getting incoming calls with voip.ms, I think it is just their system, so I just use them for outgoing only which has been pretty good I don't have any problems with incoming voip.ms calls. I think most people set the NAT Keep Alive way to high (mine is at 15). |
|
 | reply to Dave2 im pretty sure its not a problem with voip.ms but with my ATA
anyways i changed my FXS Ren setting to 5 and its been working fine for the last 15 minutes - moved it back to 0 as the same symptoms popped up again. it could be a coincidence so ill test it out for a longer period of time but it looks promising. i didn't think a self powered phone would need a higher REN setting but it could be something to do with the cordless headset and would also explain why the problem only worsened on the standalone phone |
|
 | spoke to soon - everythings the same this morning |
|
 | said by conitssap:spoke too soon - everything's the same this morning IMHO, it's time to capture some traffic and see what is actually going wrong. |
|
 | reply to fritzthevan its not your equipment or anyone elses, been having trouble with incoming calls for months now, no matter which server I change to makes no difference, don't know what they are doing bout it but I think nothing, tech support was no help, half of my incoming calls never get through, time toi switch ? i would rather not but this is getting pretty bad |
|
 dnoyeBFerrous Phallus join:2000-10-09 Southfield, MI | reply to conitssap is there any wifi in the picture? Getting worse with a cordless phone might point to that. |
|
 | reply to Stewart said by Stewart:said by conitssap:spoke too soon - everything's the same this morning IMHO, it's time to capture some traffic and see what is actually going wrong. I believe you may like this post from MartinM . |
|
 | its blame to victim time again, obviously there are major problems with voip.ms handling incoming calls and they don't want to resolve it or even acknowledge it, they know most users do not talk to each other so most think it is their own problem, basically voip.ms is not usable for reliable incoming, too bad as their prices are good, but I guess you get what you pay for or in this case, less than what you pay for, getting rid of voip.ms as soon as possible |
|
 PX EliezerPremium join:2008-08-09 Hutt River kudos:13 Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
·Optimum Voice
·Vitelity VOIP
·Gizmo5
| said by pauleyisle :getting rid of voip.ms as soon as possible OK, I am sure that Anveo can port your number quickly.
said by pauleyisle :its blame to victim time again
Yes, I [do] blame the victim if he talks about it endlessly, posts multiple posts in multiple threads on the same day saying the exact same thing, and seems more interested in bitching than in actually taking action....
It's the 6 am bus and real quiet. All of a sudden, an old bubbeh yells out "Oy am I thirsty!" "Oy am I thirsty!" "Oy am I thirsty!" And she goes on and on and on at the top of her lungs.
The sleepy passengers beg the bus driver to stop at the next corner and get the lady a drink already!
So he does. "Here lady! Drink up!"
She drinks the drink. The bus moves on. The passengers nod off again or peek into their newspapers, happy the old bubbeh is quiet. All of a sudden they hear....
"Oy WAS I thirsty!" "Oy, was I thirsty!"
|
|
 | reply to conitssap The plural of anecdote isn't data, but I'll add my own experience:
I ported to Voip.ms about a month ago after the CC fiasco. I have two DIDs (one ported, one new), with relatively low volume of calls. While I admit that my original server choice (Seattle) was leading to some packet loss, once PX put me on the right path to Houston, I've been all set. Not once, zero, have I had a call fail to complete, or a call fail to be received.
Am I just lucky? Maybe. But I think it's a little far fetched to say that Voip.ms is having a massive problem that they're keeping under wraps. I'm sure it's frustrating to have an issue that is taking time to resolve, and while my own limited experience with their tech support was positive, maybe they could use improvement there. I don't know. All I know is that my service (on the Houston server) has been rock solid. |
|
 | reply to Stewart I tried a dumb hub but that did not work - I am assuming I need a crossover cable when connecting it directly to the laptop? |
|
 | said by conitssap:I tried a dumb hub but that did not work - I am assuming I need a crossover cable when connecting it directly to the laptop? You need three cables to the dumb hub, one from the device, one from the monitoring PC, and one from the rest of your LAN. If your PC connects at faster than 10 Mbps, it's not a dumb hub. If hub is labeled "switching hub" or similar, it's not a dumb hub. Make/model?
Connecting directly to the laptop, a straight cable will work if at least one device has auto MDI/MDX. I don't know whether either of your ATAs have it. For the PC side, if the NIC is gigabit-capable, it likely does, otherwise probably not. However, it doesn't hurt to try it and see. A few seconds after making the connection, type ipconfig at a command prompt. If the NIC in question shows "media disconnected" or similar, it's not working and you'll need a crossover cable. |
|