Thanks for the replies guys! I will probably add a length test to invalidate too short numbers! By the way, I had a quick look in the ITU recommendation ( https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-E.164/en) and looks like the short numbers are for local purposes only being part of the "Non-ITU-T E.164 numbers" section, so I guess the function should return false in this case. Also it seems the + sign is recommended but not mandatory for a E.164 number, which is quite confusing.....
Kind regards, Patrick Wakano On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 at 08:57, Henning Westerholt <[email protected]> wrote: > Am Montag, 3. Dezember 2018, 06:08:27 CET schrieb Patrick Wakano: > > I am using the is_e164() function to validate the number we receive, and > I > > come to see that the number +555 was accepted.... > > After some googling it looks like(it is not very clear though) that 7 > > digits are the minimum we could have for e164 numbers but after checking > > the source code, I saw it accepts anything starting with + and having > > between 2 and 16 numbers. So is it really valid to have a number with > just > > 2 digits? What is the case? > > Hello Patrick, > > I think the implementation was done with a pragmatic approach, to make > sure > that we don't reject numbers that are used in the field. The ITU standard > Amendment A mentions the possibility to use national short numbers, for > example. The standard mentions that the maximal length should be 15, but I > think in this case this was also implemented a bit more relaxed. > > The original implementation from the enum module allows even longer > numbers, I > will check if this should be synchronized. > > Best regards, > > Henning > > > -- > Henning Westerholt - https://skalatan.de/blog/ > Kamailio services - https://skalatan.de/services > Kamailio security assessment - https://skalatan.de/de/assessment >
_______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List [email protected] https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
