Hi, Denis!
According to the table data I wrote in the tutorial [1], it's definitely
seconds. It's a pity that the docs do not reflect this as well -- I'll
get them fixed!
Best regards,
[1]: http://www.opensips.org/Documentation/Tutorials-FraudDetection-2-1
Liviu Chircu
OpenSIPS Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com
On 06.06.2018 14:20, Denis via Users wrote:
Hello, Liviu!
It is me, again:)))
One more, call_duration measured in seconds or in minutes?
Thank you.
--
С уважением, Денис.
Best regards, Denis
27.04.2018, 09:25, "Denis via Users" <users@lists.opensips.org>:
Hello, Liviu!
OK, i understand.
.
But, to speak the truth, it would be more reasonable to control
exactly numbers, but not prefix.
Because, now, "sequential calls" and "total calls", actually, perform
the same control task.
My experience tell me, that many fraud cases deal with calling to the
same number in a some time period.
Anyway, thank you!
--
С уважением, Денис.
Best regards, Denis
26.04.2018, 08:22, "Liviu Chircu" <li...@opensips.org
<mailto:li...@opensips.org>>:
Yes, exactly. Apologies for my incomplete example scenario!
Best regards,
Liviu Chircu
OpenSIPS Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com <http://www.opensips-solutions.com/>
On 26.04.2018 07:57, Denis via Users wrote:
Liviu, it seems, i confused.
You gave an example
"the "sequential calls" holds the size of the last batch of
calls sent
to the same number. For example, if a user were to dial 44 and 45
prefixes in a round-robin manner, his "sequential calls" value
would
never exceed 1"
So, it seems, that if we have TWO PREFIX field in fraud detection
table with one profile, with 44 and 55 content, and ONE user
were to
dial 44 (for example 44667788 or 44223344 etc) and 45 (4567788 or
44223344 etc)
prefixes in a round-robin manner, his "sequential calls" value
would
never exceed 1.
In my case i have only ONE prefix - 810 - and, although, user were
dial different numbers but with common prefix (810) "sequential
calls"
increased by one every call. And when counter reached predetermined
value calls have started blocking.
Am i right?
Thank you.
--
С уважением, Денис.
Best regards, Denis
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users@lists.opensips.org>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users@lists.opensips.org>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
,
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users@lists.opensips.org>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
