I'm trying to implement a system that works with faxes. We have a gatewary, phone to T.38 (fax over IP). I need a library that will let me do the other end, T.38 to TIFF image. I'm doing this on a mac, and we work with C, C++, php, java.
A program that will quietly turn T.38 into T.37 (fax over email) would work just as well.
Does anyone know of either of these?
A T.38 gateway is really just the modem section to take FAX analog "audio" data on the phone line and turns it a straight binary digital packet stream of lower level T.30 HDLC data. The T.38 standard does specify some level of application level decoding to extend the timers in certain FAX acknolwedgement handshakes....in effect the T.38 gateway buys some time at his end with the FAX machine at the other end of the phone call while stuff makes it through the IP network...especially if there is packet loss etc. However, all of that is going on between the T.38 gateway and the FAX machine....not towards the IP network.
So, if you really want to peer into the IP packet end of the T.38 gateway and actually want to get access to the FAX'ed document images and render that as TIFF, what you really are looking for is T.30 FAX Termination since T.30 specifies the format of the HDLC data and how to encode/decode that content. In effect, you have to implement the FAX machine's logic to capture the documents into TIFF in the same way that a real FAX machine would have captured the images and printed to paper.
ie: What you are really for is a T.30 implementation, not a T.38 implementation. Note that part of the the T.30 standard also references T.4 which describes how the the actual image data is compressed within the context of T.30.
Relative to going from T.38 to T.37, while I suppose that would be theoretically possible, understand that just like T.38, the T.37 standard assumes that one end of such a gateway is the analog domain. That is, the standard of T.37 specifies how to go from analog to an email message in the same way that T.38 goes from analog to real-time digital packet stream. In the context of the standards there is no "double hop" from T.38 to T.37 to get to your FAX images....so I think finding an existing implementation seems unlikely.
In the end, what you need is a T.30 FAX termination implementation since the T.38 gateway you are talking to is already doing the modem part for you. Alternatively, another way of looking at this is that you want a T.37 gateway instead of a T.38 gateway.
Asterisk the open source PBX uses the SpanDSP library to implement faxing. It looks like that library has modules to handle T.38 and the other protocols InSciTek Jeff mentioned.
Hylafax may work for you, if you're willing to use linux somewhere.
I use asterisk + iaxmodem + hylafax. Hylafax is designed to receive/send faxes. Received faxes are saved as tiffs or pdf's or sent to an arbitrary script of your own making for processing. Hylafax expects to use real modems. Iaxmodem simulates a real modem while really being an IAX2 (voip protocol like sip) connection to asterisk.
If you're really hardcore, you could look at extracting the 'conversion' part out of hylafax and turning it into a library for your own use on the mac. It is open source.
OPAL is a library that supports T.38 (Only up to 14400) (It can also use spandsp to deal with G711 audio containing fax tones). Commercial options also exist, mostly from Dialogic and Commetrex.
Related
I am involved in a project where we have some kind of IoT device. An nxp processor with an LTE modem on a PCB. The software running on it connects to the modem over a single uart interface. It will initialize the modem through AT commands, and finally made a data call to the provider (PPP).
Then, it uses lwIP (light weight IP) to open some mqtt subscriptions, and allow user code to make http get/post requests to our servers.
Every 15 minutes we want to retrieve signal strength from the modem and report this back to the server. What I do now, is put the modem back in command mode, retrieve the signal strength info, go back to data mode, and resume normal operation.
The round trip from data mode, to commando mode, and back to data mode takes several seconds (4-5 ish). This is annoying, because during that time we are not receptive for commands.
I've read about gsm mux 07.10. By following some defined protocol it allows to create virtual serial ports, over one physical uart. That sounds nice, although I realize this will go at the cost of performance (bytes will be added to each frame we send to either command mode / data mode).
The gsm mux 07.10 spec dates from 1999. I am far from an expert in mobile solutions. I was wondering: is muxing still the way to go? How does a typical smart phone deals with this for example? Do they include modems with more than one uart to have parallel access to AT commands and a live internet connection? Or do they in fact still rely on gsm mux?
If somebody would be so kind to give some insights. Also on potential C libraries that are available that implement gsm mux 07.10? It seems that TinyGSM implements it (although I can't seem to find where), and I also can find the linux kernel driver that implements gsm mux 07.10. But that driver is written on top the tty interfaces in linux, so that would mean I would have to reverse engineer the kernel driver and strip out the tty stuff and replace it with my own uart implementation.
First of all, the spec numbering is the old GSM specification numbering, so those old specs will never be updated, the new specifications with new numbering scheme will. I do not remember when the switch was made, but I do remember someone at work giving a presentation on 07.10 probably around 1998/1999, so probably a few years after that or around that time (and definitely before 2009).
The newer spec numbering scheme uses three digits for the first part.
So for instance the old AT command spec 07.07 is now 27.007, and the current 07.10 multiplex specification is 27.010.
The following is what I remember of 07.10.
The motivations for developing 07.10 was to exactly support the kind of scenario that you describe. Remember back in the mid 90's, if mobile phones had a serial interface then that was RS-232 though each manufacturer's proprietary connector at the bottom of the phone. One single serial interface.
However, in order to use 07.10 mux in serial communication you needed to install some specific serial drivers in Windows with support for 07.10 (and I think maybe there was some reliability issue with them?), and for that reason 07.10 never took of and became anything more than an rarely used solution.
Also by the end of the 90's additional serial interfaces like Bluetooth and IrDA became available on many phones, and later USB as well, which both added additional physical interfaces as well as natively multiplexing within each protocol.
So the need for multiplexing over physical RS-232 became less of an issue, and whatever little popularity 07.10 ever had dwindled down to virtual nothing.
Fast forward a couple of decades and suddenly someone asks about it on stackoverflow. Good on you :) As far as I can tell I cannot see any fundamental problems with using it for the purpose you present.
Modern smart phones that support AT commands will most likely have a code base for the AT command parsing with roots in the 90's, which most likely include the AT+CMUX command. Of course manufacturers today have zero explicit wish for supporting it, but when it is already present it will just come along with the collection of all other legacy AT commands that they support.
So if the modem supports AT+CMUX you should be good to go. I have no experience or recommendation with regards to client protocol libraries.
I'm trying to understand whether its redundant for me to include some kind of CRC or checksum in my communication protocol. Does the chrome.serial and other chrome hardware communication API's in general if anyone can speak to them (e.g. chrome.hid, chrome.bluetoothLowEnergy, ...)
Serial communications is simply a way of transmitting bits and its major reason for existence is that it's one bit at a time -- and can therefore work over just a single communications link, such as a simple telephone line. There's no built-in CRC or checksum or anything.
There are many systems that live on top of serial comms that attempt to deal with the fact that communications often takes place in a noisy environment. Back in the day of modems over telephone lines, you might have to deal with the fact that someone else in the house might pick up another extension on the phone line and inject a bunch of noise into your download. Thus, protocols like XMODEM were invented, wrappering serial comms in a more robust framework. (Then, when XMODEM proved unreliable, we went to YMODEM and ZMODEM.)
Depending on what you're talking to (for example, a device like an Arduino connnected to a USB serial port over a wire that's 25 cm long) you might find that putting the work into checksumming the data isn't worth the trouble, because the likelihood of interference is so low and the consequences are trivial. On the other hand, if you're talking to a controller for a laser weapon, you might want to make sure the command you send is the command that's received.
I don't know anything about the other systems you mention, but I'm old enough to have spent a lot of time doing serial comms back in the '80s (and now doing it again for devices using chrome.serial, go figure).
I'm using Chrome's serial API to communicate with Arduino devices, and I have yet to experience random corruption in the middle of an exchange (my exchanges are short bursts, 50-500 bytes max). However, I do see garbage bytes blast out if a connection is flaky or a cable is "rudely" disconnected (like a few minutes ago when I tripped over the FTDI cable).
In my project, a mis-processed command wont break anything, and I can get by with a master-slave protocol. Because of this, I designed a pretty slim solution: The Arduino slave listens for an "attention byte" (!) followed by a command byte, after which it reads a fixed number of data bytes depending on the command. Since the Arduino discards until it hears an attention byte and a valid command, the breaking-errors usually occur when a connection is cut while a slave is "awaiting x data bytes". To account for this, the first thing the master does on connect is to blindly blast out enough AT bytes to push the Arduino through "awaiting data" even in the worst-case-scenario. Crude, yet sufficient.
I realize my solution is pretty lo-fi, so I did a bit of surfing around and I found this post to be pretty comprehensive: Simple serial point-to-point communication protocol
Also, if you need a strategy for error-correction over error-detection/re-transmission (or over my strategy, which I guess is "error-brute-forcing"), you may want to check out the link to a technique called "Hamming," near the bottom of that thread - That one looked promising!
Good luck!
-Matt
Im writing application that communicate (via serial port) with electronic device which i designed myself.
When my PC application starts - it opens available COM ports one by one and it sends some string ("What are you?" for example).
My device is programmed, to reply to that "magic question" with own ID (for example: "I am evil device for supervising employees").
When my PC software receive that "magic reply" it starts working normally and its not searching other ports anymore.
Of course im not using stupid questions in data transmission, its just example.
Question is - can i send strings like on all (not busy) ports, to discover my device?
If I can - how that "question" string should look? Are there any normalized standards?
This is not first project like this on my desk, but now im developing solution for little industry and i need to pay more attention what my application is doing, because there may be other devices connected to COM ports and I do not know how they can react.
Im sorry, if i made some language mistakes, english is my third language.
Thanks in advance for replies.
After Alvin Wong confirmed my concerns I thought about it again and redesigned my device discovery functionality, because I don't want to abandon that idea.
I will send unique-complicated-ID every 1-5 seconds from device.
When my PC starts - it will try to open sequentially all available ports and will listen for that ID for few seconds.
If application receive that ID - it will be confirmation, that port number/name is correct and I my connection is established.
No, you wouldn't want to do that.
When you are using COM serial port, you have no idea what is plugged into the port. It could be nothing, your device, a modem, a mouse (though I believe nobody uses this anymore...) or whatever you can't even imagine.
Imagine if it is connected to another computer (probably a Linux/router), sending things may lead to execution of "that command", thus creating unexpected effects (though your program may not notice). Or if it is some badly-programmed device, it may trigger a bug in the firmware, thus failing the device and making it malfunction.
In short, in the worst case, you can cause a catastrophic event.
Serial (RS232 or UART I assume) communications don't have a designated transfer protocol (in contrast to USB which has one) to identify a device, so it isn't fail-safe. The user must make sure he selected the correct port. This is probably one of the reasons why hardware manufacturers choose USB, and one of the reasons why USB is so popular, even to computer idiots.
I would like to use a GSM modem to make a voice call to a phone number, play a recorded message, wait for a digit to be pressed and then disconnect the call. The system needs to know if the line was busy, if the user answered and which digit was pressed by user (if any). It should drop the line if nothing is pressed in 30 seconds. If user presses the digit before the question is completed then the voice should stop (user doesn't have to wait). Also, it would be nice if system could handle invalid digits (play "invalid digit" message, play original message and wait for input). Multiple calls in parallel would be nice, but I guess this is not possible?
I have found this article which explains low-level interface quite nicely. However, this question is more pragmatic - which libraries and which GSM modem would you recommend? OS is Linux, modem can be either RS232 or USB. I would prefer Python, but C(++) is ok too.
BTW: this is not telemarketing, it is a notification system. Not that it matters... ;)
EDIT: I learned this system is known by keyword "IVR" (added for future searchers).
A modem is generally used for data transmission but it sounds like you are actually transmitting voice, albeit prerecorded voice, and tones.
Although you can achieve this with the extra voice capability of a voice modem as you have identified, it might actually be easier to use a GSM to VoIP gateway, unless you actually need the modems data capability for some reason.
You could connect the VoIP to GSM gateway to a low cost or free open source PABX (such as Asterisk) and use this to build your particular application.
Some gateways even support multiple SIMS so you can target the SIM which gives the lowest call rate for the number you are calling - for example if you know that the number you want to call is on a particular operator, then that operator may offer free 'on network' calls between it's SIMs. This might be an advantage if you are expecting to make a large number of calls.
If you do a web search for 'VoIP GSM gateways' you will find some examples.
The following link provides an overview also:
http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/VOIP+GSM+Gateways
I am no expert in this field but it is something of a personal project that I have wanted to dive into.
Here is what I think will be the best way to do this.
1 Get yourself a VOIP GSM Gateway like this: VOIP+GSM+Gateways
2 Link into an existing PABX system or download a free one like asterisk
Then you will need to follow the instructions of the PABX development to create your dial plans and routing. I don't know if there are any already out there but I'm sure you will find many examples of the bits and pieces you need.
I remember years ago my friend and i were playing command and conquer red alert and there was a mode were we put the others phone number and the game would dial up and connect. What was this called? and where can i find resource to program for this?
Dial-up Networking perhaps. You will have to learn how to control the modem. I remember there were some commands that looked like this: ATH0++ which was how you could make the modem do different things. Perhaps that will give you something to search for.
This resource looks kind of helpful: http://www.activexperts.com/activcomport/tutorials/modem/
One issue you might find is that there are two types of modems generally. One is an actual modem which is connected to your serial port. The other is what is typically known as a "winmodem" which is usually in a PCI slot and didn't have all of the functionality on the hardware but instead used the hardware drivers which typically only worked in Windows. MODEM stands for "MOdulator DEModulator" which means it just converts a digital signal to analog and vice versa.
In essence, it seems that if you can figure out how to program to the serial/com ports on your computer, you should be able to access the modem.
Another interesting link: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Serial_Programming:Modems_and_AT_Commands
Have a look at TAPI (Telephony API). In Windows world there is a set of APIs in the OS for this (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms737219(VS.85).aspx). The AT command set (Hayes commands) can also be used without TAPI in Windows if you treat your Modem as a COM port and send AT commands to that COM port (that's what actually TAPI does) but it isolates you from their different variants and also running initialization and other commands in a particular order.