Re: [Iaxclient-devel] Any clues in the IAX2/NAT bug?

[Steve K. <st...@st...>]

It definitely should have made it to CVS, and I was curious about 
whether this would have affected people with this NAT problem.  (We're 
really only testing IAXclient <-> asterisk (w/ our app_conference) 
calls, not the more complicated IAXClient <-> asterisk <-> somewhere 
else calls with transfer and bridging, etc that other people are working 
on).

 Sourceforge anon CVS used to be a day (or two!) behind, but I believe 
that is not any longer, and I also have an _hourly_ tarball on the 
iaxclient.sf.net site which should be up to date.

You already put it in digium CVS, but I haven't checked.

For others here:   We are currently investigating some other problems 
inside of iaxclient;  particularly these two that may affect people:

[These issues seem to affect Win32 only at the moment]

1) On some machines, there are periodic "pops" and "cracks" in both 
directions in the     audio system. 

2) Sometimes the audio system gets into a state where the input (from 
the microphone) is replaced by a "loop" of previously captured audio, 
about 1 second long.  When this happens, usually garbage of some sort is 
played to the output.   We haven't been able to isolate the conditions 
when this happens.

3) The output level control does not work properly on Win9x systems.

(1) and (2) is what we're working most diligently on right now.  There 
may be some bug in the underlying audio code, _or_ it could be memory 
corruption from somewhere unrelated.   (3) is probably unrelated, and minor.

Has anyone on the list noticed something like this?

In our debugging, we've found that we're getting these "pops" and stuff 
from way down in the Win MME "waveXXX" APIs, though, so we're trying to 
isolate it a bit from the rest of the code to see if that's the case.

Anyone know a good strategy to do "valgrind" for Win32/gcc?  Last I 
checked [not too long ago] things were pretty clean with memory checkers 
under Linux and MacOSX.

-SteveK



Mark Spencer wrote:

>That should have mad its way into CVS already, right?
>
>Mark
>
>On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Steve Kann wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Have you included the change that I made last week?  (where full frames
>>weren't being sent, only mini-frames?).
>>    
>>