Re: Failure To Train Modem Speed
Lee Howard <[email protected]> Thu, 16 Feb 2017 21:52:23 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.telephony.fax.hylafax.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 02/16/2017 06:26 PM, Brian wrote: > Anyone? > > > On 2/10/2017 2:41 PM, Brian wrote: >> Good Day, >> >> I was hoping someone could help me out with this issue. >> >> We have a Hylafax-IAXmodem-Asterisk system with a Digium Inc >> Wildcard TE121. It works very well, however we have one partner that >> we are unable to fax to. That site is using CX93010 Conexant USB >> dongle on a Windows server. They report no problems with any other >> partners. >> >> The notification email says "Problem sending the fax.: Failure to >> train remote modem at 2400 bps or minimum speed; Giving up after 3 >> attempts to send same page" >> >> This is what we see in the log: >> >> Feb 10 13:51:55.89: [29624]: SESSION BEGIN 000306517 1234567890 >> Feb 10 13:51:55.89: [29624]: HylaFAX (tm) Version 6.0.3 >> Feb 10 13:51:55.89: [29624]: SEND FAX: JOB 2089439 DEST 1234567 >> COMMID 000306517 DEVICE '/dev/ttyIAX05' FROM 'XYZ' USER fax >> Feb 10 13:51:55.89: [29624]: <-- [14:AT+FCLASS=1.0\r] >> Feb 10 13:51:55.91: [29624]: --> [2:OK] >> Feb 10 13:51:55.91: [29624]: DIAL 6243423 >> Feb 10 13:51:55.91: [29624]: <-- [12:ATDT1234567\r] >> Feb 10 13:52:14.85: [29624]: --> [7:CONNECT] >> Feb 10 13:52:16.27: [29624]: --> [2:OK] >> Feb 10 13:52:16.27: [29624]: REMOTE CSI "Fax" >> Feb 10 13:52:16.27: [29624]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r] >> Feb 10 13:52:16.59: [29624]: --> [7:CONNECT] >> Feb 10 13:52:16.69: [29624]: --> [2:OK] >> Feb 10 13:52:16.69: [29624]: REMOTE best rate 14400 bit/s >> Feb 10 13:52:16.69: [29624]: REMOTE max A4 page width (215 mm) >> Feb 10 13:52:16.69: [29624]: REMOTE max unlimited page length >> Feb 10 13:52:16.69: [29624]: REMOTE best vres 7.7 line/mm >> Feb 10 13:52:16.69: [29624]: REMOTE format support: MH, MR >> Feb 10 13:52:16.69: [29624]: REMOTE best 0 ms/scanline >> ..... >> Feb 10 13:52:55.64: [29624]: <-- [10:AT+FTM=24\r] >> Feb 10 13:52:55.66: [29624]: --> [7:CONNECT] >> Feb 10 13:52:55.66: [29624]: DELAY 400 ms >> Feb 10 13:52:56.06: [29624]: <-- data [450] >> Feb 10 13:52:56.06: [29624]: <-- data [2] >> Feb 10 13:52:58.18: [29624]: --> [2:OK] >> Feb 10 13:52:58.18: [29624]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r] >> Feb 10 13:52:58.72: [29624]: --> [7:CONNECT] >> Feb 10 13:52:59.72: [29624]: --> [2:OK] >> Feb 10 13:52:59.72: [29624]: TRAINING failed Unfortunately, there's not much that can be said beyond what the failure message is saying. The remote system didn't signal NSF and doesn't support ECM, so it's probably safe to say that the receiver is just a simple fax software application. Consequently, it sometimes is difficult to get things through on them because they may not be doing things as they should. They may report no other problems with other partners, but that's certainly incorrect. The mere fact that ECM is not supported can guarantee that they do have other problems - at least sometimes. The log shows that the receiver stays connected the entire time, so it's not hanging up even though it seems to not be responding every time it is expected to respond. That's good. However, it's signaling FTT (failure to train) at every time we see any response to our DCS+TCF. We don't know *why* the receiver is signaling FTT. That's something that the logs on the receiver's end would have to say. However, if the receiver software is developed at least somewhat rationally then FTT would either indicate that the TCF signal is not getting through clearly or that the TCF signal is not being received in its entirety. Normally that would be line audio quality issues. But, as you say, you're not having problems sending faxes elsewhere. So, really, unless you can get some better diagnostics from the receiver the only thing that you can do would be to try various different fax delivery methods until you found one that worked... and then work-out from there the differences and what made that method work but not the one you're currently using. For example, it's remotely possible that something in HylaFAX+ 5.5.8 would make a difference - but admittedly that is unlikely. If the receiver would tolerate a test fax, I would be happy to send a test fax there using my equipment that is similar to yours. Thanks, Lee. ____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Users Mailing List _______________________ To subscribe/unsubscribe, click http://lists.hylafax.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi On UNIX: mail -s unsubscribe [email protected] < /dev/null *To learn about commercial HylaFAX(tm) support, mail [email protected].*