Elastix 2.2 64bit

Status
Not open for further replies.

rnrover

Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
Hey Elastixteers, I am so proud of this product and I want to thank this community so much for helping me over the years. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT POST TO ME TO HELP ANYONE WHEN THINGS GO WRONG.

Two days ago we started having problems with our main PBX dropping calls at random. (2.0 32bit). I had completed a yum update the night before so I assumed it was something in the updates. I had also tried installing the Wolfram Google kit with Cepstral.

After we made it through the day dropping a lot of calls, I spent the next 12 hours reinstalling from scratch. I had backups but they didn't make things better. At 2:00 am after I had loaded version 2.3 64bit, I couldn't get our Cisco 7960 phones to register. Then they would register, then I would call voice mail and the phone didn't have a mailbox, even thou we had added it. We have personnel on outside cell phones and the 64bit version was not passing the caller id through to the cell phone, and would not release the call to the cell phone.

At 3:00 am I decided that the 64bit software was too buggy with the phones, and decided to load the 2.3 32bit version. After loading it I used ftp package to reload my cisco files in the tftp folder and all phones registered. 2.3 32bit is working great for the last two days.

After doing all of this it was determined that ATT had a dns issue on an outside router that was causing us to drop calls. All this reinstalling work was unnecessary and completely a waste of my time. If att had someone besides a script reader to help you they could have solved their own problem. Even when we show them the error, they still take you down that rosy red path that leads to their toilet that never gets flushed.

I would highly recommend Elastix 2.3 32bit. I will get those issues reported about the 64bit version. Now if I could just figure out how to get those great Google apps working we would have the perfect PBX. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.