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].*