[hcflinux] Caller ID not supported?

[Rick Matthews]

Linuxant support (Jonathan) wrote:
> 
> please try in Windows XP one the same machine to see if Caller ID 
> feature in Windows XP is correctly working.

I don't understand what you are asking me to do.  It sounds like you
are asking me to install Windows XP on the Linux pc where the modem
is located, but I know that's not what you are saying.

I apologize for being dense, but could you please elaborate on what
you want me to do?

Rick



> Regards,
> 
> 
> Jonathan
> Technical specialist / Linuxant
> www.linuxant.com
> support at linuxant.com
> 
> 
> Rick Matthews wrote:
> > I'm glad to hear that caller ID is working...
> > 
> > I don't know if this modem has the required hardware.  I can tell you
> > every component that's on the board, but I do not have any 
> > documentation that was delivered with the modem.  On the other hand, 
> > I have gigabytes of documentation from the web, but I can't be positive 
> > what is applicable and/or accurate.
> > 
> > AT+VCID=1 produces an OK response, as does AT+VDR=1.  I don't consider
> > that a guarantee that the required hardware is there, but I'd like to
> > think it's at least a good sign.  The software is not blindly giving 
> > responses to everything; AT+FCLASS=8 produces ERROR, and
> > consistently, AT+FCLASS=? produces '0'.
> > 
> > Thanks for the information.
> > 
> > Rick
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Steve Laverty wrote::
> > 
> >>Caller ID has worked flawlessly for me for your application for over a 
> >>year now.  The only thing I can think of is that modems need to have 
> >>additional hardware to support on-hook caller ID.  Perhaps your modem is 
> >>not equipped.  Going into minicom and typing AT+VCID=1 has always worked 
> >>for me, in fact I combine that with AT+VDR=1 so that I know which 'line' 
> >>the call came in on.  It is worth noting that I beleive that AT+VCID=1 
> >>only produces a response when not in AT+FCLASS=8.  Not sure about 1 or 
> >>1.0.  To be safe try it in 0.
> >>
> >>Steve
> >>
> >>Rick Matthews wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>My weekend project was to bring up a network caller id sever using a
> >>>127a:1003 PCI modem from the spare parts bin and the hcfpcimodem
> >>>software (1.01lnxt04072900full_k2.4.20_28.8-1rh.i586 to be exact).
> >>>
> >>>Current status: The modem gives the proper responses during 
> >>>initialization but reports only the RINGs with no cid information.
> >>>
> >>>I went back through the archives and found:
> >>>	_Seven people have inquired about caller id.
> >>>	_Only two of the seven received responses.
> >>>	_Both were asked to run "hcfpciconfig --dumpdiag".
> >>>	_Both complied and submitted their dumpdiag data.
> >>>	_Neither received any additional assistance.
> >>>	_One of the two then paid for the full version and re-asked 
> >>>	 his cid question, but received no response.
> >>>
> >>>Shouldn't caller id be added to the limitations page?
> >>>
> >>>Rick
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>%(real_name)s mailing list
> >>>%(real_name)s@%(host_name)s
> >>>%(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>%(real_name)s mailing list
> >>%(real_name)s@%(host_name)s
> >>%(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > %(real_name)s mailing list
> > %(real_name)s@%(host_name)s
> > %(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s