Summary: | ASTERISK-07296: [patch][post-1.4] AOC-D ("Advice of Charge - During call") passthrough | ||
Reporter: | Alex Mayrhofer (alexmayrhofer) | Labels: | |
Date Opened: | 2006-07-06 05:11:21 | Date Closed: | 2011-06-07 14:03:24 |
Priority: | Major | Regression? | No |
Status: | Closed/Complete | Components: | Channels/chan_zap |
Versions: | Frequency of Occurrence | ||
Related Issues: | |||
Environment: | Attachments: | ( 0) asterisk-1.2.10-aocd-aoce-diff-0.1.txt ( 1) asterisk-aocd-aoce-diff-SVNtrunk37561-0.1.txt ( 2) asterisk-aocd-aoce-diff-SVNtrunk47382-0.2.txt | |
Description: | The attached patch modifies chan_zap to pass AOC-D messages (Q.956) between bridged channels. In addition to this patch, a patch to libpri (http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=7494) is required for passthrough to work. ****** ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ****** This has been tested only on a single PRI (which means that AOC-D messages leave the same PRI from where they entered) - in a live scenario, forwarding would only occur between two different PRIs. | ||
Comments: | By: Paul Cadach (pcadach) 2006-07-06 06:39:20 There should be a check for Zap/PRI channel for bridged channel. By: Alex Mayrhofer (alexmayrhofer) 2006-07-06 07:55:05 I've added a check for channel type "Zap" and SIG_PRI before actually passing the AOC-D. (updates in zapdiff-v1.txt) By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2006-07-06 08:16:59 As this is a new feature, it must be against trunk, not against the 1.2 series. By: Alex Mayrhofer (alexmayrhofer) 2006-07-06 08:29:17 Thanks for the notice. "zapdiff-v2.txt" applies to chan_zap.c from "trunk", revision 37141. By: mimmo (mimmo) 2006-07-07 03:51:17 I'd like to test both 7494 and 7495 patches with a double PRI (* between PSTN and a legacy PBX with a billing/reporting application based on AOC) but my experience with development environment is almost null. Do I need to apply these patches to trunk? It means that it applies to every trunk version or only to 37141? To the author: is there a backport to 1.2? I could try them directly in production ;-) By: Alex Mayrhofer (alexmayrhofer) 2006-07-07 04:03:40 The patches should apply to a wide range of "trunk" versions - i _should_ actually apply to 1.2 versions as well - there have not been much changes to libpri... You will probably need to insert the new lines of code manually if "patch" fails. By: Serge Vecher (serge-v) 2006-07-07 09:20:49 mimmo, alexmayrhofer: before the discussion about 1.2 backport goes any further, please bear the following in mind: Generally, feature patches are ok to be provided for release branch in the bugtracker under the following conditions: a) there is no expectation of the 1.2 patch to be merged into the release branch; b) there is a trunk patch provided and is updated often if trunk changes break it; c) there is no support offered for 1.2 patch via the bugtracker. Feel free to use off-bugtracker resources, though, like email or www.asterisk-backports.org. Thanks. By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-07-10 10:11:33 Hi! I'm a co-worker of alexmayrhofer also working on this. I've extended work to also support freeOfCharge messages. But currently I experience a problem when the first AoC-D message is received, but the bridge is not yet setup (the FACILITY is received before Asterisk sends the CONNECT message on the other call leg). Is there a mechanism in Asterisk/zaptel which allows to queue a message to be sent as soon the call leg gets into "connected" state? By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-07-10 10:14:30 one more question: if the bridge is not yet setup, ast_bridged_channel() can't be used to find the related call leg. Is there another function to find the channel which caused the outgoing call? By: Serge Vecher (serge-v) 2006-07-10 11:17:25 klaus3000: please email the asterisk-dev mailing list with those questions -- the list has more exposure, so there is a higher chance you will get an answer ;) Also, if you contribute any code, please don't forget to mention that you have a disclaimer on file (if don't, then please file it). Thanks. By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-07-13 15:00:15 Hi! I've uploaded a new patch. This patch also requires the new patch (0.1) for libpri (bug 7494). There you will also find the documentation. By: Serge Vecher (serge-v) 2006-07-13 15:10:37 are zapdiff-v?.txt files still needed? By: Serge Vecher (serge-v) 2006-07-13 15:11:57 klaus3000, please confirm your disclaimer status. By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-07-13 16:10:01 sorry: disclaimer is on file By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-07-13 16:11:48 no, the zapdiff-... are not needed anymore. Also the libpri-aocd-diff.txt patch in ASTERISK-7295 is not needed anymore. By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-07-31 06:16:55 Added backported patch for 1.2. Maybe we can address more testers this way. By: Serge Vecher (serge-v) 2006-07-31 10:08:11 same principle of testing backports as outlined in 7494 also applies here ;) By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-08-07 09:42:50 Yes, I know that we need testing results with 1.4. Nevertheless I wanted to let you know that this patch is used with Asterisk 1.2 against a Siemens HiPath 4000 and works without problem since 1 week. By: jmls (jmls) 2006-10-31 14:26:58.000-0600 alexmayrhofer, would you be able to update this patch to apply against the latest trunk ? Thanks By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-11-01 03:24:38.000-0600 Hi! I will take care of it. By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-11-02 10:26:11.000-0600 just a note: I think I won't find time before VON Europe (next week). So I should have done it by the end of next week. By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-11-09 12:12:25.000-0600 updated to trunk By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-11-09 12:50:55.000-0600 wait I moment, there is a problem and I have to send another patch ... By: klaus3000 (klaus3000) 2006-11-10 09:07:58.000-0600 false alarm, patch asterisk-aocd-aoce-diff-SVNtrunk47382-0.2.txt is fine By: jmls (jmls) 2007-09-12 16:28:03 this had been updated to trunk, but didn't get looked at. Is it worth me asking the guy for another patch for trunk, or should we close this ? By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2007-11-12 14:09:14.000-0600 Reporter lost interest. |