On Thursday 07 April 2011 17:52:20 Rony wrote: > On Thursday 07 April 2011 12:39 PM, jtd wrote: > > On Wednesday 06 April 2011 22:44:35 H.S.Rai wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:09 AM, jtd<[email protected]> wrote: > >>> On Tuesday 05 April 2011 07:14:15 H.S.Rai wrote: > >>> > >>> Revert back with the results of the test. The fact that minicom > >>> reports "ring" shows that the ring detect is ok. > >> > >> The EPBAX we are having support "Group 4" protocol, while efax > >> support "Group 3". > >> > >> I guess Hylafax do support Group 4: > >> > >> http://www.hylafax.org/man/4.4.4/hylafax-info.4f.html > >> > >> Tag, Type, Description > >> supports2DEncoding, boolean,accepts Group 3 2D encoding > >> supportsMMR, boolean, accepts Group 4 encoding > >> > >> What is the opinion of experts? Am I right? > > > > Fax machines wil negotiate to the highest acceptable capability. > > Thus GIV implies GIII capability. Besides ring has nothing to do > > with this. G IV provides for special encoding and error recovery. > > The OP should ask the EPABX guy if he can alter the ring type or > increase ringer voltage.
Good catch Rony. Much easier to do than mucking around with AT commands setting ring cadence and frequency. It was always a pain. -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
