Re: [hylafax-users] Problems with PPS and sending with Rocket

[Lee Howard <faxguy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2004.06.17 03:55 Pedro Rocadas wrote:
> Hi guys. After a fresh instalation here is some
> problems that I'm getting into.
> Red Hat 9.0 hylafax 4.2.0beta1 for RH8. I have some
> considerations here: noisy lines (PBX), modem firmare,
> bad port?
>
> I was forced to put off-line the port of the
> Rocketport(ISA) card that I was using for outbound
> jobs. I tried sending fax to a Ricoh 1700 and a
> Toshiba and the results are pretty the same, but the
> ugglyest was to the Ricoh
>
> Log:
>
> Jun 17 10:40:23.71: [ 8261]: SESSION BEGIN 000000150
> XXXXXXXXXXXX
> Jun 17 10:40:23.71: [ 8261]: HylaFAX (tm) Version
> 4.2.0beta1
> Jun 17 10:40:23.71: [ 8261]: SEND FAX: JOB 50 DEST
> 225512794 COMMID 000000150 DEVICE '/dev/ttyR0'
> Jun 17 10:40:23.71: [ 8261]: <-- [12:AT+FCLASS=1\r]
> Jun 17 10:40:23.82: [ 8261]: --> [2:OK]
> Jun 17 10:40:23.83: [ 8261]: DIAL 0,XXXXXXXXX
> Jun 17 10:40:23.83: [ 8261]: <--
> [16:ATDT0,XXXXXXXXX\r]
> Jun 17 10:40:42.31: [ 8261]: --> [7:CONNECT]
> Jun 17 10:40:43.45: [ 8261]: --> [2:OK]
> Jun 17 10:40:43.45: [ 8261]: REMOTE NSF "00 00 25 00
> 00 00 12 10 4D 02 00 50 00 2A B8 2C"
> Jun 17 10:40:43.45: [ 8261]: NSF remote fax equipment:
> Ricoh
> Jun 17 10:40:43.45: [ 8261]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r]
> Jun 17 10:40:43.47: [ 8261]: --> [7:CONNECT]
> Jun 17 10:40:43.80: [ 8261]: --> [2:OK]
> Jun 17 10:40:43.80: [ 8261]: REMOTE NSF "00 00 25 01
> 4E 50 42"
> Jun 17 10:40:43.80: [ 8261]: NSF remote fax equipment:
> Ricoh
> Jun 17 10:40:43.80: [ 8261]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r]
> Jun 17 10:40:43.82: [ 8261]: --> [7:CONNECT]
> Jun 17 10:40:44.12: [ 8261]: --> [2:OK]
> Jun 17 10:40:44.12: [ 8261]: HDLC frame with bad
> control field 0x1

Here we expected to receive CSI or DIS, but we got a corrupt frame.  
This could be due to noisy lines, bad modulators on the devices, PBX, 
etc., etc.

> Jun 17 10:40:44.12: [ 8261]: DELAY 200 ms
> Jun 17 10:40:44.32: [ 8261]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r]
> Jun 17 10:40:51.32: [ 8261]: --> [0:]
> Jun 17 10:40:51.32: [ 8261]: MODEM <Empty line>
> Jun 17 10:40:51.32: [ 8261]: <-- data [1]
> Jun 17 10:40:51.52: [ 8261]: MODEM <Timeout>
> Jun 17 10:40:51.52: [ 8261]: DELAY 200 ms
> Jun 17 10:40:51.72: [ 8261]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r]
> Jun 17 10:40:58.72: [ 8261]: --> [0:]
> Jun 17 10:40:58.72: [ 8261]: MODEM <Empty line>
> Jun 17 10:40:58.72: [ 8261]: <-- data [1]
> Jun 17 10:40:58.92: [ 8261]: MODEM <Timeout>
> Jun 17 10:40:58.92: [ 8261]: DELAY 200 ms
> Jun 17 10:40:59.12: [ 8261]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r]
> Jun 17 10:41:06.12: [ 8261]: --> [0:]
> Jun 17 10:41:06.12: [ 8261]: MODEM <Empty line>
> Jun 17 10:41:06.12: [ 8261]: <-- data [1]
> Jun 17 10:41:06.32: [ 8261]: MODEM <Timeout>
> Jun 17 10:41:06.32: [ 8261]: DELAY 200 ms
> Jun 17 10:41:06.52: [ 8261]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r]
> Jun 17 10:41:13.52: [ 8261]: --> [0:]
> Jun 17 10:41:13.52: [ 8261]: MODEM <Empty line>
> Jun 17 10:41:13.52: [ 8261]: <-- data [1]
> Jun 17 10:41:13.72: [ 8261]: MODEM <Timeout>
> Jun 17 10:41:13.72: [ 8261]: DELAY 200 ms
> Jun 17 10:41:13.92: [ 8261]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r]
> Jun 17 10:41:20.92: [ 8261]: --> [0:]
> Jun 17 10:41:20.92: [ 8261]: MODEM <Empty line>
> Jun 17 10:41:20.92: [ 8261]: <-- data [1]
> Jun 17 10:41:21.12: [ 8261]: MODEM <Timeout>
> Jun 17 10:41:21.12: [ 8261]: DELAY 200 ms
> Jun 17 10:41:21.32: [ 8261]: <-- [9:AT+FRH=3\r]
> Jun 17 10:41:28.32: [ 8261]: --> [0:]
> Jun 17 10:41:28.32: [ 8261]: MODEM <Empty line>
> Jun 17 10:41:28.32: [ 8261]: <-- data [1]
> Jun 17 10:41:28.52: [ 8261]: MODEM <Timeout>
> Jun 17 10:41:28.52: [ 8261]: DELAY 200 ms
> Jun 17 10:41:28.72: [ 8261]: No answer (T.30 T1
> timeout)
> Jun 17 10:41:28.72: [ 8261]: SEND FAILED: JOB 50 DEST
> XXXXXXXXX ERR No answer (T.30 T1 timeout)
> Jun 17 10:41:28.72: [ 8261]: <-- [9:AT+FTH=3\r]
> Jun 17 10:41:31.27: [ 8261]: --> [0:]
> Jun 17 10:41:31.27: [ 8261]: <-- [5:ATH0\r]
> Jun 17 10:41:36.27: [ 8261]: MODEM <Timeout>
> Jun 17 10:42:06.30: [ 8261]: SESSION END

But, we never get another peep from the machine.

> The next log is from a Multitech modem and what is
> strange is that I got a PPS error which, I guess,
> shouldn't appears because ECM was used.

PPS is with ECM, and yes, you can get a "no response to PPS" error with 
ECM.  Did the receiver actually get the fax page?  If so, then the 
post-page delays are too short.  If not, then the pre-page delays are 
too short.

Lee.

____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Users Mailing List _______________________
 To subscribe/unsubscribe, click http://lists.hylafax.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi
On UNIX: mail -s unsubscribe hylafax-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx < /dev/null
 *To learn about commercial HylaFAX(tm) support, mail sales@xxxxxxxxx*