On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 12:23 -0400, M. Ranganathan wrote: > Hello > > The p-asserted Identity patch is confusing freeswitch it seems and > this is having a negative impact on interop testing. Moreover, it does > not support the header in the way ITSPs want. > > What ITSPs want is - if the From header is [EMAIL PROTECTED], the > p-asserted-identity header should contain the specific caller-id that > they want to see (normally placed in the from header and present in > the Dial plan). Otherwise, the signaling should not contain such a > header. This is not what the p-asserted-id change currently does. May > I suggest a revision of this feature to work as above.
Can you please try that requirements statement again with no pronouns? The purpose of P-Asserted-Identity is to provide a (weakly secured) way to provide the "true" identity of the caller when that would not be the same as the From header. Can you give an actual example of two calls? Our motivations for adding PAI were not just related to the SIP trunk usage (and, given what you say, it may not help there). The main motivation is to provide a robust way to use the caller as an input to some routing decisions. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
