Does anyone have an opinion that the tag
<loose-route-invite>true</loose-route-invite>
should be made configurable in sipxbridge?
I ran across one tempermental ITSP that requires it (supposedly). I can edit
it and restart services to temporarily see if that changes the "reason' they
are failing the calls (according to them).
I suspect that as a TRUNK, ;lr is not an issue, but it is on the handsets
only depending on the switch/switch type you connect to. I think this is a
case of an ITSP "calling" themselves commercial and really centered around
residential/consumer traffic so they require this to be OFF from the client
(i.e.no ;lr tag). This is the kind of thing that makes me want to say "run
very fast, get a real provider", but I wanted opinions.
I suspect it might be relatively easy to add the option to make it
configurable, but realistically, is it resonable for a trunk provider to
refuse a call because it is there. I think it is NOT reasonable, but that's
me.
--
======================
Tony Graziano, Manager
Telephone: 434.984.8430
sip: [email protected]
Fax: 434.326.5325
Email: [email protected]
LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
Telephone: 434.984.8426
sip: [email protected]
Helpdesk Contract Customers:
http://support.myitdepartment.net
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev/
