Hi,
I think I have narrowed the problem down to it being an unsupported feature with our upstream provider.
privacy=full yields:
//-1/55BF806C8E6E/SIP/Info/sipSPISetInfoFromRpid: Received ;screen=yes
;privacy=full -> Setting Octet3A 0xA1, extended_privacy 0x00
Hi Daniel, can you send a trace of the pstn protocol ? debug isdn q931 or something----- Original Message -----From: Daniel PoulsenSent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 8:05 PMSubject: [Serusers] RPID privacy
Hi,
I am trying to give my users the option of disabling caller ID if they so choose by dialing a code. I can tack on rpid using append_rpid_hf() just fine, but for some reason my privacy flags seem to be ignored. Perhaps I am not processing them properly?
One observation:
I've noticed most people on the list using the format:
append_rpid_hf("<sip:","@localhost; user=phone>;party=calling;screen=no;privacy=full")
When use this format my tcpdumps show:
Remote-Party-ID: <sip:sip:2125551212@my.sip-domain.com@localhost; user=phone>;party=calling;screen=no;privacy=full")
I have to use:
append_rpid_hf("<","; user=phone>;party=calling;screen=no;privacy=full")
...to get it to look correct in the headers. This strikes me as odd that everyone else uses the former and I must use the latter.
I am using ser-0.9.3 (Soon to upgrade to 0.9.3!!) and the gateway is a Cisco AS5350. I've looked as Cisco DOCS and the header seems to be structured properly. I'm sure it is something stupid, but I am scratching my head on this one.
Any advice?
Thank you.
Dan
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers@lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers