<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000'>Are we seriously saying that when Cisco says "fax pass-through" and "fax passthrough" they mean different things?<br><br>oh boy.<br><br>---<br>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>"Bad grammar makes me [sic]" - Tshirt<br><br><br>----- Original Message -----<br>From: "Ryan Ratliff" <rratliff@cisco.com><br>To: "Rhodium" <rhodium_uk@yahoo.co.uk><br>Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 2:57:18 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern<br>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Fwd: Cisco ATA Fax Confusion<br><br>The lack of hyphenation is because fax pass-through is modem passthrough, which is NSE based. This call is working because the ATA passes the fax tones on to the VG224 as NSEs and it recognizes them.<br><br>If we look at your config:<br>fax protocol t38 nse ls-redundancy 0 hs-redundancy 0 fallback pass-through g711ulaw<br><br>This means upon detection of the fax-tones (call outbound from VG224 to ATA) the VG will attempt to switch to T38. The fallback pass-through means that if T38 fails it will send NSEs as well. This is the part that is compatible with the ATA.<br><br>-Ryan<br><br>On Jan 22, 2010, at 1:42 PM, Rhodium wrote:<br><br>Hi Ryan,<br><br>I am using the terms as per the Cisco Press book "Fax, Modem, and Text for IP Telephony" by David Hanes and Gonzalo Salgueiro. Excellent reference!<br><br>I guess what is throwing me off is your lack of hyphenations in the terms pass-through and passthrough in your replies. I understand the following:<br><br>fax pass-through - Protocol based fax transmission<br>fax passthrough - NSE based fax transmission<br><br>As regards what I am seeing, yeah but the configuration doesn't imply that as one is setup for T.38 relay with pass-through fall back and the ATA is obviously only passthrough so I guess only a debug will answer that question as I was wondering whether the VG was falling back to NSE based passthrough for some reason.<br><br>To be honest, I wouldn't expect it to work at all so why I am asking this knowledgeable forum about it incase I missed something in the documentation.<br><br><br>Thank you for your reply as well as to all the other contributors.<br><br>Regards,<br><br>Jason<br><br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>cisco-voip mailing list<br>cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<br></div></body></html>