im using a pap2 with sipgate for incoming calls and sipdiscount for
outgoing. in the pap2 settings ive set both to using only the g711u codec
for best sound quality.
the sipdiscount calls are fine but the incoming sipgate calls suffer from
drop outs on all calls. the drop outs last for 10 or so seconds every few
minutes; i can hear the caller but the sound is not continuous. ive changed
the codec to g729a and there are no drop outs but the overall sound quality
is greatly reduced, and sounds much worse than a mobile to mobile.
a month ago everything was fine it's only happened recently. has anyone
else experienced the same and or have any workarounds to this problem,
"Seth" <adamsc@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:Ht6%g.46639$lT5.9834@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.u k
> hi
>
> im using a pap2 with sipgate for incoming calls and
> sipdiscount for outgoing. in the pap2 settings ive set
> both to using only the g711u codec for best sound quality.
The G711a (rather than 711u) codec is specified for UK/EU usage, but the
differences are minimal so it shouldn't make much difference. You might
want to try 711a though.
> the sipdiscount calls are fine but the incoming sipgate
> calls suffer from drop outs on all calls. the drop outs
> last for 10 or so seconds every few minutes; i can hear
> the caller but the sound is not continuous. ive changed
> the codec to g729a and there are no drop outs but the
> overall sound quality is greatly reduced, and sounds much
> worse than a mobile to mobile.
>
> a month ago everything was fine it's only happened
> recently. has anyone else experienced the same and or
> have any workarounds to this problem,
IIRC the PAP2 is functionally similar to the Sipura 2000, so the settings
should be the same. Can you post screenshots of the settings anywhere and
I'll see if I can see anything obviously wrong. I'm using a SPA2000 on
Sipgate with no current problems.
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:4q4as4FlhcbdU1@individual.net...
> "Seth" <adamsc@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:Ht6%g.46639$lT5.9834@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.u k
> > hi
> >
> > im using a pap2 with sipgate for incoming calls and
> > sipdiscount for outgoing. in the pap2 settings ive set
> > both to using only the g711u codec for best sound quality.
>
> The G711a (rather than 711u) codec is specified for UK/EU usage, but the
> differences are minimal so it shouldn't make much difference. You might
> want to try 711a though.
>
> > the sipdiscount calls are fine but the incoming sipgate
> > calls suffer from drop outs on all calls. the drop outs
> > last for 10 or so seconds every few minutes; i can hear
> > the caller but the sound is not continuous. ive changed
> > the codec to g729a and there are no drop outs but the
> > overall sound quality is greatly reduced, and sounds much
> > worse than a mobile to mobile.
> >
> > a month ago everything was fine it's only happened
> > recently. has anyone else experienced the same and or
> > have any workarounds to this problem,
>
> IIRC the PAP2 is functionally similar to the Sipura 2000, so the settings
> should be the same. Can you post screenshots of the settings anywhere and
> I'll see if I can see anything obviously wrong. I'm using a SPA2000 on
> Sipgate with no current problems.
>
> Ivor
>
>
"Chris" <adamsc@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:kW6%g.46916$lT5.24126@fe2.news.blueyonder.co. uk
[snip]
> i'll have a go at the g711a and see how that goes (unless
> there's anything else in the link above that you find)
>
> much appreciated,
>
> chris
Ok, I've had a quick look.
On the System tab, nothing to do with your problem but I'd recommend you
change the port of the web server access to something other than 80 (say
81) as this will reduce the chance of it being seen from the outside
world. Also put a password in.
On the SIP page, again it may be nothing to do with the problem, but I
have all settings in the NAT Support Parameters section at the bottom of
the screen set to YES with the exception of STUN Test Enable, which should
be NO.
On the Regional tab, set Ring Waveform to Sinusoid. Also FSX port
impedance to 270+750||150nF.
Apart from that, I can't see anything obviously out of place, also none of
the above settings are critical, but at least I've told you how things are
set here.
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:4q4decFl3gaqU1@individual.net...
> "Chris" <adamsc@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:kW6%g.46916$lT5.24126@fe2.news.blueyonder.co. uk
>
> [snip]
>
> > i'll have a go at the g711a and see how that goes (unless
> > there's anything else in the link above that you find)
> >
> > much appreciated,
> >
> > chris
>
> Ok, I've had a quick look.
>
> On the System tab, nothing to do with your problem but I'd recommend you
> change the port of the web server access to something other than 80 (say
> 81) as this will reduce the chance of it being seen from the outside
> world. Also put a password in.
>
> On the SIP page, again it may be nothing to do with the problem, but I
> have all settings in the NAT Support Parameters section at the bottom of
> the screen set to YES with the exception of STUN Test Enable, which should
> be NO.
>
> On the Regional tab, set Ring Waveform to Sinusoid. Also FSX port
> impedance to 270+750||150nF.
>
> Apart from that, I can't see anything obviously out of place, also none of
> the above settings are critical, but at least I've told you how things are
> set here.
>
> Hope it helps..!
>
> Ivor
>
>
I seem to have locked myself out of the setup menu. I entered the port 81
and set a user password and admin password (the same password)
now when i connect to 192.168.1.100:81 there's a menu asking:
Enter a username and password for "pap user" at http://192.168.1.100:81. if
i put the password i set in and leave the username black, i cant get in and
get the same dialog box back
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:4q4decFl3gaqU1@individual.net...
> "Chris" <adamsc@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:kW6%g.46916$lT5.24126@fe2.news.blueyonder.co. uk
>
> [snip]
>
> > i'll have a go at the g711a and see how that goes (unless
> > there's anything else in the link above that you find)
> >
> > much appreciated,
> >
> > chris
>
> Ok, I've had a quick look.
>
> On the System tab, nothing to do with your problem but I'd recommend you
> change the port of the web server access to something other than 80 (say
> 81) as this will reduce the chance of it being seen from the outside
> world. Also put a password in.
>
> On the SIP page, again it may be nothing to do with the problem, but I
> have all settings in the NAT Support Parameters section at the bottom of
> the screen set to YES with the exception of STUN Test Enable, which should
> be NO.
>
> On the Regional tab, set Ring Waveform to Sinusoid. Also FSX port
> impedance to 270+750||150nF.
>
> Apart from that, I can't see anything obviously out of place, also none of
> the above settings are critical, but at least I've told you how things are
> set here.
>
> Hope it helps..!
>
> Ivor
>
>
ok got in but not sure quite what i pressed! it may be because im accessing
the page using firefox which has the no script plug in enabled (i.e.
disabling javascript to 192.168.1.100:81) ill allow it. phew!
"Chris" <adamsc@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:pL7%g.48126$3D1.36697@fe3.news.blueyonder.co. uk
[snip]
> ok got in but not sure quite what i pressed! it may be
> because im accessing the page using firefox which has the
> no script plug in enabled (i.e. disabling javascript to
> 192.168.1.100:81) ill allow it. phew!
Hmm, I use Firefox and have never had a problem. The URL for the setup
pages is http://192.168.1.100:81/admin/advanced - if it asks you for a
username and password, the username is admin and the password whatever you
set. I have set Firefox to remember it so it just goes in every time.
Feel free to contact me off group with your SIP ID if you want to try a
test call. Email g6urp01 at googlemail dot com.
On 2006-10-23, Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
> Ok, I've had a quick look.
>
> On the System tab, nothing to do with your problem but I'd recommend you
> change the port of the web server access to something other than 80 (say
> 81) as this will reduce the chance of it being seen from the outside
> world. Also put a password in.
His PAP2 is behind a NATted router. The chances of it being contacted
from other than machines on his own network are effectively zero.
If port 80 traffic to the router is directed there it's a different
matter and a secure password would be essential. Even with that I don't
see changing the port to 81 improves security.
"Brian" <bandj@o2.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ehj2ik$pel$1$830fa7b3@news.demon.co.uk
> On 2006-10-23, Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Ok, I've had a quick look.
> >
> > On the System tab, nothing to do with your problem but
> > I'd recommend you change the port of the web server
> > access to something other than 80 (say 81) as this will
> > reduce the chance of it being seen from the outside
> > world. Also put a password in.
>
> His PAP2 is behind a NATted router. The chances of it
> being contacted from other than machines on his own
> network are effectively zero.
> If port 80 traffic to the router is directed there it's a
> different matter and a secure password would be
> essential. Even with that I don't see changing the port
> to 81 improves security.
Maybe, call it a belt & braces approach if you like. I'm not convinced
that NAT is 100% effective at hiding a device from outside access, my
suggestion may not make a difference but it might and doesn't cost
anything.
On 2006-10-23, Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
> "Brian" <bandj@o2.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ehj2ik$pel$1$830fa7b3@news.demon.co.uk
>> On 2006-10-23, Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> > Ok, I've had a quick look.
>> >
>> > On the System tab, nothing to do with your problem but I'd
>> > recommend you change the port of the web server access to something
>> > other than 80 (say 81) as this will reduce the chance of it being
>> > seen from the outside world. Also put a password in.
>>
>> His PAP2 is behind a NATted router. The chances of it being contacted
>> from other than machines on his own network are effectively zero. If
>> port 80 traffic to the router is directed there it's a different
>> matter and a secure password would be essential. Even with that I
>> don't see changing the port to 81 improves security.
>
> Maybe, call it a belt & braces approach if you like. I'm not convinced
> that NAT is 100% effective at hiding a device from outside access, my
> suggestion may not make a difference but it might and doesn't cost
> anything.
No service is being offered on port 80 of the router. Or on port 81 for
that matter. The router routes unsolicited packets to those ports to
oblivion, so any internal device listening on port 80 or 81 would get
nothing.
If the NAT implementation on the router was flawed (other than personal
conviction you offer no supporting evidence or explanation that that can
happen) it would make no difference having the ATA's web server on port
80 or 81. The cost of following such a suggestion lies in obscuring the
nature of the interaction between routers and VoIP devices.
"Brian" <bandj@o2.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ehjifj$ku$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk
> On 2006-10-23, Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
> > "Brian" <bandj@o2.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:ehj2ik$pel$1$830fa7b3@news.demon.co.uk
> > > On 2006-10-23, Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ok, I've had a quick look.
> > > >
> > > > On the System tab, nothing to do with your problem
> > > > but I'd recommend you change the port of the web
> > > > server access to something other than 80 (say 81)
> > > > as this will reduce the chance of it being seen
> > > > from the outside world. Also put a password in.
> > >
> > > His PAP2 is behind a NATted router. The chances of it
> > > being contacted from other than machines on his own
> > > network are effectively zero. If port 80 traffic to
> > > the router is directed there it's a different matter
> > > and a secure password would be essential. Even with
> > > that I don't see changing the port to 81 improves
> > > security.
> >
> > Maybe, call it a belt & braces approach if you like.
> > I'm not convinced that NAT is 100% effective at hiding
> > a device from outside access, my suggestion may not
> > make a difference but it might and doesn't cost
> > anything.
>
> No service is being offered on port 80 of the router. Or
> on port 81 for that matter. The router routes unsolicited
> packets to those ports to oblivion, so any internal
> device listening on port 80 or 81 would get nothing.
The router's own web server is probably on port 80.
> If the NAT implementation on the router was flawed (other
> than personal conviction you offer no supporting evidence
> or explanation that that can happen) it would make no
> difference having the ATA's web server on port 80 or 81.
> The cost of following such a suggestion lies in obscuring
> the nature of the interaction between routers and VoIP
> devices.
Possibly, but it works for me and still costs nothing other than minor
configuration changes.
On 2006-10-23, Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
> "Brian" <bandj@o2.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ehjifj$ku$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk
>> No service is being offered on port 80 of the router. Or on port 81
>> for that matter. The router routes unsolicited packets to those ports
>> to oblivion, so any internal device listening on port 80 or 81 would
>> get nothing.
>
> The router's own web server is probably on port 80.
It has an internal IP.
>> If the NAT implementation on the router was flawed (other than
>> personal conviction you offer no supporting evidence or explanation
>> that that can happen) it would make no difference having the ATA's
>> web server on port 80 or 81. The cost of following such a suggestion
>> lies in obscuring the nature of the interaction between routers and
>> VoIP devices.
>
> Possibly, but it works for me and still costs nothing other than minor
> configuration changes.
For the futility of having the ATA's web server on port 81 to gain
security there is no 'possibly' about it.
"Brian" <bandj@o2.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ehjk7m$2ba$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk
> On 2006-10-23, Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
[snip]
> > Possibly, but it works for me and still costs nothing
> > other than minor configuration changes.
>
> For the futility of having the ATA's web server on port
> 81 to gain security there is no 'possibly' about it.
If you say so. I'll still keep mine on 81 if it's all the same to you and
I'll let others make up their own minds.
Thus spaketh Seth:
> hi
>
> im using a pap2 with sipgate for incoming calls and sipdiscount for
> outgoing. in the pap2 settings ive set both to using only the g711u
> codec for best sound quality.
>
> the sipdiscount calls are fine but the incoming sipgate calls suffer
> from drop outs on all calls. the drop outs last for 10 or so seconds
> every few minutes; i can hear the caller but the sound is not
> continuous. ive changed the codec to g729a and there are no drop
> outs but the overall sound quality is greatly reduced, and sounds
> much worse than a mobile to mobile.
>
> a month ago everything was fine it's only happened recently. has
> anyone else experienced the same and or have any workarounds to this
> problem,
>
> many thanks in advance
>
> chris
The last 2 - 3 weeks I've been having the same problem on my Sipgate
numbers, people are having to call my non-Sipgate number more and more
because of the dropouts, it has to be something their end.
"{{{{{Welcome}}}}}" <bhx___spam@trapped___hotmail.co.uk>
wrote in message
news:p3d%g.40588$r61.18149@text.news.blueyonder.co .uk
[snip]
> The last 2 - 3 weeks I've been having the same problem on
> my Sipgate numbers, people are having to call my
> non-Sipgate number more and more because of the dropouts,
> it has to be something their end.
So why aren't I having problems..? (Cue Dexter...)
If you want to try a test call or two, call me, I think you've still got
my number..? If not, let me know.
"meggahurtz" <nobody@here.com> wrote in message
news:youdnTJtkeNLaaDYnZ2dnUVZ8qSdnZ2d@giganews.com
> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
> news:4q552oFl4lmtU1@individual.net...
> > So why aren't I having problems..? (Cue Dexter...)
> >
>
> Because your the only one who seem to never do....
Not true, I do have problems sometimes, but not at the moment. Nor am I
the only one. Please tell the truth or don't say anything at all.
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:4q6oq7Floj4jU1@individual.net...
> Please tell the truth or don't say anything at all.
>
> Ivor
>
"meggahurtz" <nobody@here.com> wrote in message
news:5OqdnXV5t4E_rKPYnZ2dnUVZ8tOdnZ2d@giganews.com
> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
> news:4q6oq7Floj4jU1@individual.net...
> > Please tell the truth or don't say anything at all.
> >
> > Ivor
> >
>
> Truth hurts does it?
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:4q6smnFlhfthU1@individual.net...
>
> When it *is* the truth. Lies hurt far worse.
>
> Ivor
>
"meggahurtz" <nobody@here.com> wrote in message
news:_aOdnecDR7lwzaPYnZ2dnUVZ8tSdnZ2d@giganews.com
> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
> news:4q6smnFlhfthU1@individual.net...
> >
> > When it *is* the truth. Lies hurt far worse.
> >
> > Ivor
> >
>
> God i`m bored.
Good, I've succeeded..! Now go away and find something constructive to do
somewhere else.
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:4q4decFl3gaqU1@individual.net...
> "Chris" <adamsc@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:kW6%g.46916$lT5.24126@fe2.news.blueyonder.co. uk
>
> [snip]
>
> > i'll have a go at the g711a and see how that goes (unless
> > there's anything else in the link above that you find)
> >
> > much appreciated,
> >
> > chris
>
> Ok, I've had a quick look.
>
> On the System tab, nothing to do with your problem but I'd recommend you
> change the port of the web server access to something other than 80 (say
> 81) as this will reduce the chance of it being seen from the outside
> world. Also put a password in.
>
> On the SIP page, again it may be nothing to do with the problem, but I
> have all settings in the NAT Support Parameters section at the bottom of
> the screen set to YES with the exception of STUN Test Enable, which should
> be NO.
>
> On the Regional tab, set Ring Waveform to Sinusoid. Also FSX port
> impedance to 270+750||150nF.
>
> Apart from that, I can't see anything obviously out of place, also none of
> the above settings are critical, but at least I've told you how things are
> set here.
>
> Hope it helps..!
>
> Ivor
>
Lots of testing over the last 24hrs.
I integrated the changes and nothing much changed untill I altered to the
g711a codec. That last step almost elimintated the drop outs but it did
reduce the overall sound quality (slightly tinny sound and slightly
distorted) which isnt too serious for a short conversation but gets
distracting on a longer call.
So I'll live with sipgate like that for the moment. I find the sipdiscount
sound quality superior (with the g711u codec), and there arent any drop
outs. But contrary to this, others dont have any problems with sipgate.
If I get any more progress on this i'll post the results. Thank you Ivor
for the assistance,
Thus spaketh Ivor Jones:
> "{{{{{Welcome}}}}}" <bhx___spam@trapped___hotmail.co.uk>
> wrote in message
> news:p3d%g.40588$r61.18149@text.news.blueyonder.co .uk
>
> [snip]
>
>> The last 2 - 3 weeks I've been having the same problem on
>> my Sipgate numbers, people are having to call my
>> non-Sipgate number more and more because of the dropouts,
>> it has to be something their end.
>
> So why aren't I having problems..? (Cue Dexter...)
>
> If you want to try a test call or two, call me, I think you've still
> got my number..? If not, let me know.
>
> Ivor
The drop outs happen mostly 7 - 10 mins into a call, though some are
sooner, last for about 10 - 20 seconds and then maybe another 4 - 8 mins
until the next.
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:4q4decFl3gaqU1@individual.net...
> "Chris" <adamsc@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:kW6%g.46916$lT5.24126@fe2.news.blueyonder.co. uk
>
> [snip]
>
>> i'll have a go at the g711a and see how that goes (unless
>> there's anything else in the link above that you find)
>>
>> much appreciated,
>>
>> chris
>
> Ok, I've had a quick look.
>
> On the System tab, nothing to do with your problem but I'd recommend you
> change the port of the web server access to something other than 80 (say
> 81) as this will reduce the chance of it being seen from the outside
> world. Also put a password in.
>
> On the SIP page, again it may be nothing to do with the problem, but I
> have all settings in the NAT Support Parameters section at the bottom of
> the screen set to YES with the exception of STUN Test Enable, which should
> be NO.
>
> On the Regional tab, set Ring Waveform to Sinusoid. Also FSX port
> impedance to 270+750||150nF.
>
> Apart from that, I can't see anything obviously out of place, also none of
> the above settings are critical, but at least I've told you how things are
> set here.
>
> Hope it helps..!
>
> Ivor
>
>
Ivor
if you set STUN Test enable to "No" on some of the latest firmwares for the
SPA2000 the box will continually reauthenticate - you need to set this to
"Yes" if you are using STUN (Im not sure if the PAP2 has the same issue)
"Roger" <roger@rwbarrett.co.uk> wrote in message
news:C4j0h.4867$RR2.4673@newsfe2-win.ntli.net
[snip]
> Ivor
> if you set STUN Test enable to "No" on some of the latest
> firmwares for the SPA2000 the box will continually
> reauthenticate - you need to set this to "Yes" if you are
> using STUN (Im not sure if the PAP2 has the same issue)
Hmm, that's interesting. I have my SPA2000 set to STUN Test "No" and the
Sipgate line on it authenticates hourly, as it is set to do, but the other
line which is on Gradwell re-registers every 30 seconds and takes no
notice of the settings for that parameter.
I don't recall now why I set STUN Test to off, I think I had a problem
with not getting through audio between the two lines, which doing this
seemed to solve. I will try it set to On and see what happens.
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:4qe59uFmmrbkU1@individual.net
> "Roger" <roger@rwbarrett.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:C4j0h.4867$RR2.4673@newsfe2-win.ntli.net
>
> [snip]
>
> > Ivor
> > if you set STUN Test enable to "No" on some of the
> > latest firmwares for the SPA2000 the box will
> > continually reauthenticate - you need to set this to
> > "Yes" if you are using STUN (Im not sure if the PAP2
> > has the same issue)
>
> Hmm, that's interesting. I have my SPA2000 set to STUN
> Test "No" and the Sipgate line on it authenticates
> hourly, as it is set to do, but the other line which is
> on Gradwell re-registers every 30 seconds and takes no
> notice of the settings for that parameter.
> I don't recall now why I set STUN Test to off, I think I
> had a problem with not getting through audio between the
> two lines, which doing this seemed to solve. I will try
> it set to On and see what happens.
> Ivor
Replying to my own post, I set STUN Test to Yes and it made not a scrap of
difference. The Sipgate line registers once an hour, the Gradwell line
every 30 seconds, despite both lines having the same settings. Any
ideas..?!
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:4qe5plFmjcelU1@individual.net...
>
>
> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
> news:4qe59uFmmrbkU1@individual.net
>> "Roger" <roger@rwbarrett.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:C4j0h.4867$RR2.4673@newsfe2-win.ntli.net
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> > Ivor
>> > if you set STUN Test enable to "No" on some of the
>> > latest firmwares for the SPA2000 the box will
>> > continually reauthenticate - you need to set this to
>> > "Yes" if you are using STUN (Im not sure if the PAP2
>> > has the same issue)
>>
>> Hmm, that's interesting. I have my SPA2000 set to STUN
>> Test "No" and the Sipgate line on it authenticates
>> hourly, as it is set to do, but the other line which is
>> on Gradwell re-registers every 30 seconds and takes no
>> notice of the settings for that parameter.
>> I don't recall now why I set STUN Test to off, I think I
>> had a problem with not getting through audio between the
>> two lines, which doing this seemed to solve. I will try
>> it set to On and see what happens.
>> Ivor
>
> Replying to my own post, I set STUN Test to Yes and it made not a scrap of
> difference. The Sipgate line registers once an hour, the Gradwell line
> every 30 seconds, despite both lines having the same settings. Any
> ideas..?!
>
> Ivor
>
>
which firmware have you got? I've got 3.1.8 on my 1001 and 3.1.5 on my 2000.
Mine reregisters every second without the test set to "no" but I only got
this problem after upgrading to 3.1.5 and later (from memory)
"Roger" <roger@rwbarrett.co.uk> wrote in message
news:KOl0h.17535$gO3.15609@newsfe7-win.ntli.net
> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
> news:4qe5plFmjcelU1@individual.net...
[snip]
> > Replying to my own post, I set STUN Test to Yes and it
> > made not a scrap of difference. The Sipgate line
> > registers once an hour, the Gradwell line every 30
> > seconds, despite both lines having the same settings.
> > Any ideas..?!
>
> which firmware have you got? I've got 3.1.8 on my 1001
> and 3.1.5 on my 2000. Mine reregisters every second
> without the test set to "no" but I only got this problem
> after upgrading to 3.1.5 and later (from memory)
It's 3.1.5 which is the latest version available for the 2000 on the
Sipura site.
I can live with it, 30 seconds is tolerable and calls on the line in
question are fine, with no dropouts or other problems, it's just rather
curious that it registers every 30 seconds seemingly regardless of
settings. I did wonder if it was something to do with Gradwell, but I
can't see how. I did ask them some time ago but don't recall the reply.
"meggahurtz" <nobody@here.com> wrote in message
news:youdnTJtkeNLaaDYnZ2dnUVZ8qSdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
>
> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
> news:4q552oFl4lmtU1@individual.net...
> > So why aren't I having problems..? (Cue Dexter...)
> >
>
> Because your the only one who seem to never do....
>
>
I may have found the solution. It's people calling me using 1899 from a
landline.
There they mention crackles, background noise and 'breaking up' which is
what I called drop outs. And it's only happened more recently which is the
same as what I have been experiencing.
sipgate drop outs 
Linear Mode
