> On March 31, 2015, 12:23 p.m., Mark Michelson wrote: > > One thing to take into consideration here is that there are some places > > within Asterisk where we will send an AST_CONTROL_UNHOLD frame on a > > channel, even though it may not currently be on hold. This means you may > > send some unhold ARI events that don't match up with a previous hold event. > > This is probably worth documenting somewhere so that ARI application > > writers know what they might have to deal with.
In what circumstances do we do that? - Matt ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4549/#review14988 ----------------------------------------------------------- On March 27, 2015, 10:19 p.m., Matt Jordan wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4549/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 27, 2015, 10:19 p.m.) > > > Review request for Asterisk Developers and Joshua Colp. > > > Bugs: ASTERISK-24922 > https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-24922 > > > Repository: Asterisk > > > Description > ------- > > For some applications - such as SLA - a phone pressing hold should not behave > in the fashion that the Asterisk core would like it to. Instead, the hold > action has some application specific behaviour associated with it - such as > disconnecting the channel that initiated the hold; only playing MoH to > channels in the bridge if the channels are of a particular type, etc. > > One way of accomplishing this is to use a framehook to intercept the > hold/unhold frames, raise an event, and eat the frame. Tasty. The patch > attached to this issue accomplished that as a new dialplan function, > HOLD_INTERCEPT. > > In addition: > * ARI now queues hold/unhold frames instead of indicating frames directly. > This allows for the Stasis hold/unhold messages to be raised. > * Some general cleanup of raising hold/unhold Stasis messages was done, > including removing some RAII_VAR usage. > > > Diffs > ----- > > /branches/13/rest-api/api-docs/events.json 433677 > /branches/13/res/stasis/control.c 433677 > /branches/13/res/stasis/app.c 433677 > /branches/13/res/ari/ari_model_validators.c 433677 > /branches/13/res/ari/ari_model_validators.h 433677 > /branches/13/main/stasis_channels.c 433677 > /branches/13/main/manager_channels.c 433677 > /branches/13/main/channel.c 433677 > /branches/13/main/bridge_channel.c 433677 > /branches/13/funcs/func_holdintercept.c PRE-CREATION > /branches/13/CHANGES 433677 > > Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4549/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > See Gerrit reviews: > > https://gerrit.asterisk.org/#/c/16 > https://gerrit.asterisk.org/#/c/17 > > > Thanks, > > Matt Jordan > >
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
