received logs show - FAILURE "Handshaking failed"
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
received logs show - FAILURE "Handshaking failed&q... - 11.Sep.2008 11:30:36 PM
|
|
|
prx
Posts: 2
Joined: 11.Sep.2008
Status: offline
|
GFI Faxmaker 14.1 (Build 20080208)
Brooktrout TR1034+24H-T1-1N-R
My logs seem to be consistent on these handshaking failure errors. The majority of transmissions are successful but I'm wondering if I should be concerned about these handshake errors. Please help. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: received logs show - FAILURE "Handshaking fail... - 17.Sep.2008 10:17:21 AM
|
|
|
JoeKern
Posts: 285
Joined: 28.Apr.2008
Status: offline
|
Prx,
Well If you upgrade to the latest build of FAxmaker 14.2 there is an updated Brooktrout Driver. If the issue continues I suggest that you open a trouble ticket so that we can look into the cause.
http://crm.gfi.com/Customizations/SupportIssue/support.aspx?lcode=en
_____________________________
Joe Kern - JKern@gfi.com
Technical Support Representative - GFI Software - www.gfi.com Messaging, Content Security & Network Security Software
|
|
|
|
|
RE: received logs show - FAILURE "Handshaking fail... - 19.Sep.2008 2:46:24 PM
|
|
|
prx
Posts: 2
Joined: 11.Sep.2008
Status: offline
|
Hi Joe,
I actually had a ticket open but it appears that your support team did not find anything wrong after inspecting the sent/received logs plus the line debugging logs that was sent to them.
I will try your suggestion of upgrading to 14.2 and have the ticket re-opened if the problems persist.
Thanks for your help!
< Message edited by prx -- 22.Sep.2008 9:14:41 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: received logs show - FAILURE "Handshaking fail... - 16.Oct.2008 8:42:08 AM
|
|
|
quintex
Posts: 1
Joined: 16.Oct.2008
Status: offline
|
I also am having the received logs show - Failure "Handshaking Failed" or "Handshaking failure: 54" and I am using the latest Faxmaker 14.2 build 20080703 with a Brooktrout TR1034+E2-2L. I read another post that this is possibly a flow control problem and to use a hardware flow control (recommended) or software flow control driver for your modem. Where can I change this? That same post mentions that the DLE codes passing method is best set to indirect or both, Where can I change this?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: received logs show - FAILURE "Handshaking fail... - 16.Oct.2008 9:15:18 AM
|
|
|
Ruscoe
Posts: 7
Joined: 15.Aug.2008
Status: offline
|
I get this sort of error an awful lot and it isn't necessarily to do with the modem driver, it could be that the recipient is using an older fax that doesn't have page acknowledgement. I have tried various solutions to this, but this often ends up with the recipient having 5 page 1s (or cover pages if sent)
Can we not have an option in the next patch that continues to send the fax even if handshaking fails?
At least then if the recipient ends up with 5 copies of a two page fax they have a copy... Better that than five copies of page one and no page two (IMHO)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: received logs show - FAILURE "Handshaking fail... - 20.Oct.2008 10:07:54 AM
|
|
|
mharri
Posts: 40
Joined: 15.Nov.2006
Status: offline
|
I am not trying to be bitter, but we had the same situation happen to us several months ago. GFI blamed our Brooktrout boards. Brooktrout blamed GFI Faxmaker software. We spent thousands of dollars for new boards, but the problem still existed. I am convinced there was nothing wrong with our old boards.
There appears to be a serious disconnect between GFI and Brooktrout. They continue to deny that there is, but I am first hand experience of that.
GFI wanted me to take my production server down and use it for their testing purposes. These kinds of problems should have been dealt with in their own testing environment. We finally had to roll back to an older Brooktrout driver to get things functional again. It turns of that there was some sort of incompatibility between a new version of Faxmaker and the new Brooktrout driver.
I never heard of a software company that expected their own customers to be the Beta testers to resolve their problems. These guys really need to get their act together in terms of communication and testing, as I see these problems continue to this day. Both companies tried to pass the buck and blame each other. Their products are suppose to compliment each other. Why don't these two companies try and do the same?
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Printable Version
