Long time for spa9000 to ring spa942s

Unanswered Question
Mar 23rd, 2009

Hello,

I have a spa9000 connected to a spa400 with four pstn lines that were part of a VERY old phone system. Everything is set to my liking except that it takes about three rings before the spa system sends out a ring to all our phones (942s). I have read the manuals thoroughly and can't seem to find what the problem is. The spa400 indicates incomming calls instantly. This was a problem from the very begining, so it must be a default or hardware problem.

Thanks,

James

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Patrick Born Mon, 03/23/2009 - 16:12

Hi James,

It's not a hardware problem, it's by design.

This delay is caused by the SPA400 web-ui > Setup > Voice tab > Voice Setting > Dialing Parameters > Answer after: 2 Rings (Not less than 2)

It takes 2 rings for caller id information to propagate to the SPA400, hence the enforced delay.

Regards,

Patrick

----------

krpacisco Sat, 03/28/2009 - 15:59

Hi Patrick,

Is there any  way to reduce the time (less then 2)?

Regards,

Kresimir

Patrick Born Mon, 03/30/2009 - 14:46

Hi Kresimir,

In 1.1.2.2 there is no way to select less than 2 rings before ringing an IP phone.

We're looking into ways to reduce the number of rings, but I cannot promise anything at this time.

Regards,

Patrick

----------

ryhicks Sun, 03/29/2009 - 09:58

Patrick,


I just upgraded my lab SPA400 and SPA9000 to the latest posted releases and see that there is no way to change this parameter in the SPA400. It would seem that SBS customers should be able to disable caller id if needed. Is there a way to force the SPA400 to not look for caller id and ring in instantly? If not, it seems that we a forcing SPA400\SPA9000 customers to use a SIP or ISDN service to get needed functionality. The outside user usually hears a ringback tone 3 times before the IP phone rings once. At this time this is not a viable solution for SBS users. I would think they would at least like to choose between CID and the perception of terrible response time at minimum.

Patrick Born Mon, 03/30/2009 - 14:49

Hi Ryan,

As I said to Kresimir in an earlier post, we're aware of the issue and are busy working on a resolution for this.

Regards,

Patrick

-----------

markgruber Wed, 05/06/2009 - 21:55

My customer (spa9000 + spa400 + spa9x2 all on latest firmware) noticed this delay right away. For them to first hear their spa962 ring on an inbound call took on average three rings on the calling end.  Sometimes it was longer.  This was uanacceptable for them.  I did a lot of tracing and found that the combination of delays by the spa400 plus delays in getting the notification to the SPA962 resulted in this long delay on the calling end.

I have found that in other asterisk-based solutions where the PSTN interface is integrated with the switch, the ringing and caller id popped up in one to two rings on the calling side.

Patrick Born Fri, 05/08/2009 - 11:27

Hi Mark,

This delay is due the the SPA400 not allowing anything less than 2 in the Setup > Voice > Voice Setting > Dialing Parameters > Answer after: field.

The intent of this was to allow the SPA400 enough time to collect caller id information.

We're testing new firmware, release date yet to be determined, that allows this field to be set at less than two.

Regards,

Patrick

-----------

markgruber Sat, 05/09/2009 - 06:35

Thanks  for the info Patrick.  Looking forward to that update.  Will this work like a analog phone where the ringing can begin immediately but the caller id follows afterward?

Patrick Born Mon, 05/11/2009 - 14:32

Hi Mark,

No, if you set the Answer after field too low, then caller id will not be displayed.

We did this in response to users:

- who aren't interested in caller id, they just want the phone to ring as fast as possible

- who receive caller id information well within 2 rings and don't want to wait at least two rings

Regards,

Patrick

----------

DanBasford Tue, 07/28/2009 - 05:43

Hi Patrick,

Has there been a date set for the firmware up-date to allow us to drop the dealy for incoming calls to less than 2 seconds, we have a client with an urgent need for this functionality and wondered if the fix was on the horizon.

Regards

Dan

Patrick Born Wed, 08/19/2009 - 07:42

Hi Dan,

Last I heard the update was in regression testing... I'll check on the status and report back.

Regards,

Patrick

-----------

robdowns Tue, 01/12/2010 - 17:51

I tried the 1.1.2.3 that was posted in your link and it does not change the ring option to less than two.  It still has it in there as more than 2 and I tried smaller anyway and it didnt' take it or do it.  Just FYI.  It was posted in July 2009, so I don't know if a newer version does address it.

markgruber Tue, 02/09/2010 - 17:03

Any update on the availability of new firmware that will allow us to set the SPA400 rings lower than two?????  It looks like it was not fixed in the beta you posted last.

Mark

crooney29 Wed, 03/24/2010 - 11:45

Another request for a status update on the new firmware that will address the ring delay issue. Looking at the release notes on the SPA9000 product pages in the Cisco site, it looks like the last Firmware release for the 9000 or the 400 was in 2008.

Does Cisco plan to still support this product, or is it being sunsetted?

Patrick, please provide a status on the upcoming release when you can.

marcinleplawy Fri, 04/16/2010 - 00:52

Another request for a status update on the new firmware that will  address the ring delay issue.

Does Linksys relased any newer beta than 1.1.2.3 or coul you tell me how to reduce number of ring to answer less than 2. That limit it's more imortant than incoming caller ID from DTMF.

Alberto Montilla Fri, 04/16/2010 - 08:49

Dear Sir;

There is no plan to release new firmware to address this design behavior.

Regards
Alberto

marcinleplawy Fri, 04/16/2010 - 09:48

Have You got any idea how can i solve that problem there is any other FXO gateway with no limit ring to answer?

markgruber Sat, 04/24/2010 - 16:21

I have finally given up on the SPA9000 / SPA400 (anyone want to buy my  old ones) after years of fighting problems and now use Trixbox and PBX  in a Flash.

I still have one SPA400 out there connected to a  Trixbox system - it has the two ring problem.  With a Sangoma 4 port FXO  card the Trixbox works great - rings right away, no waiting.  The  Trixbox is much easier to configure and reliable than the SPA9000. Plus  now you can use the inexpensive low power Intel Atom-based PCs for the  small installations - competes very well with the SPA9000.

I am still using the SPA942 and SPA962 IP phones with the Trixbox.   They work well although they do not have enough buttons/indicators and  are not as programmable as some of the other IP phones like the Aastra  and even Grandstream phones. I do not use them on new installations,  just on those where I had the SPA9000.

crooney29 Sun, 04/25/2010 - 14:19

Alberto,

Cisco employee Patrick Born's posts from last year are in direct conflict to your statement that no new firmware release is planned to address the dial delay issue. Last year Patrick indicated that the new firmware to address the issue was in regression testing. Where is the true?

williamkorb Fri, 05/07/2010 - 07:13

It seems to me the only reason for the decision to stop fixing known bugs is that this product line is to be phased out. If that is the case, I hope that there are plans for an upgrade path for existing customers.

Bill

Actions

This Discussion

Related Content