I have found them to be wrong on occasions...
if the destination of 4495 is on the motel side, why are we dialling or stripping digits instead if defining the destination a d sending it as is? On Sep 1, 2011 6:40 PM, "Steve Beaudry" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > Organization: SipXecs Forum > In-Reply-To: <CAMgKNJWM52QdgtXvx_yptfpQe0qecu4+cMOnRepq= [email protected]> > X-FUDforum: 08063afcdd00a6e76393c5b9527381e8 <63025> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > > > > Thanks Tony, > > Absolutely nothing would make me happier than to have > someone point out a simple solution to this problem, where I > had over complicated it. > > Exactly as you have suggested, I believed the problem was > with a dialplan/route on the Patton gateway. I put in other > dialplan entries on the patton, but it would not respect > them (I put in an entry for the exact number I was dialling, > 4495, and it simply ignored the route. In fact, through a > fair bit of troubleshooting, I found that the route table > wasn't being evaluated there... I opened a ticket with > Patton engineers, and spoke to them back and forth for about > a week, until we determined the problem. The route table on > the Patton is not being evaluated, because the REFER-TO > comes in already qualified for the > mailto:'@voip.royalroads.ca' for which it has a route. Any > URI ending in anything OTHER than it's IPAddress/hostname is > sent to the SipXecs server. We (the Patton Engineers and I) > tried using functions of the Patton gateway to strip the > URI, but without success. > > Patton insists that the issue needs to be resolved before > the REFER-TO reaches the gateway, and I have come to agree. > > > Why, when I dial '4495', should the INVITE reach the > gateway as '994495' (around which the routes on the gateway > are developed), but when I TRANSFER a call to '4495', the > REFER-TO reach the gateway as '4495'? The behaviour is > inconsistent. Direct dialed calls are 'transformed' by the > dialplan, but REFER-TO transfers are not. > > If sending the mailto:'[email protected]' were a > valid configuration, why does the SipXecs server send the > call as mailto:'[email protected]' when a call in initiated? > I suggest that it is because the mailto:'[email protected]' > format is CORRECT, but it is an oversight in the code that > 'REFER-TO' packets are not updated per the same rules as > 'INVITE' packets. > > Please understand, I do not wish to be argumentative, and > am simply pointing out what I have already tried. I have > already spent significant time with Patton support trying to > sort out the issue there, before referring the issue here. > > Cheers, and VERY respectfully, > > ...Steve... > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
