On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 09:58 -0300, Tony Graziano wrote:
> There's no tracker issue yet - It was suggested to create one since the
> CDR record "showed" when active, but is not visible under historic. This
> may have o do with the error code received back when it failed and
> whether sipx could properly interpret the code and write the record?
> 
> In either case the call failed, but the bigger issue is that it
> "probably" failed since the dialplan is executing a prefix that is
> stated to be numeric only, since I can enter "9+" instead of "9".  One
> would suspect sipxconfig should not allow this to be entered if it is
> not setup to address it properly.
> 
> I'm not sure I can enter a tracker issue right now since I don't
> totally understand how I got in this mess to begin with and have had to
> revert from our production system to a standby PBX (analog) system in
> order to dial out right now.
> 
> I'm curious to know if there is a way to manually modify the prefix to
> allow a character other than numeric only and see if sipx will properly
> strip the character.
> 
> If it cannot, then the issue would be? If the number dialed is 
> 
> "+19195551212", 
> 
> How come sipx can't execute it it it's a valid E164 number? Or, why is
> a "+" not allowable in the preifx if its a valid character for E164?

The proxy can certainly handle that - whether or not there is an issue
with getting it configured so that it works and displays correctly is
still to be determined.

> Once I understand how to "workaround" this, or not, I can file a
> tracker issue that more thoroughly explains the problem as a whole so it
> can be addressed one time, instead of two.

We don't need to wait for a solution to file an issue - the issue is the
problem statement, so let's get back to figuring that part out.  Please
file the issue and put into it the answers to these questions:

Can you enter '+' as an optional prefix digit in your dial plan w/
sipXconfig, and if so does it then propogate to the fallbackrules.xml
file?

If you can, does that correctly make the call?  If not, please attach a
snapshot taken after making the attempt, with logging on all components
set to INFO.  Identify the call by called and calling number and
approximate time (or even better, call-id).

The '%2B' you're seeing in some places is probably an artifact of some
overly-aggresive character translation somewhere (we'll have to track
that down), but it should work - that is the SIP-standard hex-escaped
version of '+', and _should_ be treated exactly the same as '+' in the
user part of a URL (but "should" is a bad word in interoperability
discussions).
 

-- 
Scott Lawrence  tel:+1.781.229.0533;ext=162 or sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  sipXecs project coordinator - SIPfoundry http://www.sipfoundry.org/sipXecs
  CTO, Voice Solutions   - Bluesocket Inc. http://www.bluesocket.com/ 
                                           http://www.pingtel.com/

_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users

Reply via email to