10 May
2007
10 May
'07
11:05 a.m.
Hi all,
I've got a problem with call waiting function. This one allow us to hang
out a call when we are already in communication.
But when I press "R" on my phone to take the second call, there is one
INVITE and one ACK generated by the proxy and being accounted in MySQL.
It's the same when I switch between both callers. So I can have for the
same callid 2 3 4...X INVITE ACK and one BYE. So in SERWeb for example,
I can see for one call 3 lines of accounting.
Thanks for you support.
Adrien .L
11 May
11 May
1:06 p.m.
That's because the other call is put on hold and an INVITE is sent with
0.0.0.0 as IP address to indicate that.
Such INVITEs will be loose_route'd in your script, so don't account
INVITEs that go through loose route logic.
g-)
inge wrote:
Hi all,
I've got a problem with call waiting function. This one allow us to hang
out a call when we are already in communication.
But when I press "R" on my phone to take the second call, there is one
INVITE and one ACK generated by the proxy and being accounted in MySQL.
It's the same when I switch between both callers. So I can have for the
same callid 2 3 4...X INVITE ACK and one BYE. So in SERWeb for example,
I can see for one call 3 lines of accounting.
Thanks for you support.
Adrien .L
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
2:53 p.m.
Thanks for your answer.
I use accounting in route{}. So I just need to add a !loose_route() in
my if block when I want to account for INVITE and ACK request ?
Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 12:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
That's because the other call is put on hold and
an INVITE is sent with
0.0.0.0 as IP address to indicate that.
Such INVITEs will be loose_route'd in your script, so don't account
INVITEs that go through loose route logic.
g-)
inge wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've got a problem with call waiting function. This one allow us to hang
> out a call when we are already in communication.
>
> But when I press "R" on my phone to take the second call, there is one
> INVITE and one ACK generated by the proxy and being accounted in MySQL.
>
> It's the same when I switch between both callers. So I can have for the
> same callid 2 3 4...X INVITE ACK and one BYE. So in SERWeb for example,
> I can see for one call 3 lines of accounting.
>
> Thanks for you support.
>
> Adrien .L
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
>
>
3:55 p.m.
No, you have to make sure that INVITEs that go into your
if(loose_route()) { ... } don't get accounted.
g-)
inge wrote:
Thanks for your answer.
I use accounting in route{}. So I just need to add a !loose_route() in
my if block when I want to account for INVITE and ACK request ?
Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 12:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
That's because the other call is put on hold
and an INVITE is sent with
0.0.0.0 as IP address to indicate that.
Such INVITEs will be loose_route'd in your script, so don't account
INVITEs that go through loose route logic.
g-)
inge wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've got a problem with call waiting function. This one allow us to hang
> out a call when we are already in communication.
>
> But when I press "R" on my phone to take the second call, there is one
> INVITE and one ACK generated by the proxy and being accounted in MySQL.
>
> It's the same when I switch between both callers. So I can have for the
> same callid 2 3 4...X INVITE ACK and one BYE. So in SERWeb for example,
> I can see for one call 3 lines of accounting.
>
> Thanks for you support.
>
> Adrien .L
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
>
>
>
6:13 p.m.
Hmm, but I account before if (loose_route()).
So I do :
if (method=="BYE || ... && !loose_route())
setflag(1);
};
Can I do an other thing ?
Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 14:55 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
No, you have to make sure that INVITEs that go into
your if
(loose_route()) { ... } don't get accounted.
g-)
inge wrote:
> Thanks for your answer.
> I use accounting in route{}. So I just need to add a !loose_route() in
> my if block when I want to account for INVITE and ACK request ?
>
> Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 12:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
>
> > That's because the other call is put on hold and an INVITE is sent with
> > 0.0.0.0 as IP address to indicate that.
> > Such INVITEs will be loose_route'd in your script, so don't account
> > INVITEs that go through loose route logic.
> > g-)
> >
> > inge wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I've got a problem with call waiting function. This one allow us to
hang
> > > out a call when we are already in communication.
> > >
> > > But when I press "R" on my phone to take the second call, there
is one
> > > INVITE and one ACK generated by the proxy and being accounted in MySQL.
> > >
> > > It's the same when I switch between both callers. So I can have for
the
> > > same callid 2 3 4...X INVITE ACK and one BYE. So in SERWeb for example,
> > > I can see for one call 3 lines of accounting.
> > >
> > > Thanks for you support.
> > >
> > > Adrien .L
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Serusers mailing list
> > > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
12 May
12 May
10:52 a.m.
No, that should do it.
Unless the in-call INVITEs don't have Route headers. Then you have a
buggy UA...
g-)
inge wrote:
Hmm, but I account before if (loose_route()).
So I do :
if (method=="BYE || ... && !loose_route())
setflag(1);
};
Can I do an other thing ?
Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 14:55 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
No, you have to make sure that INVITEs that go
into your if
(loose_route()) { ... } don't get accounted.
g-)
inge wrote:
> Thanks for your answer.
> I use accounting in route{}. So I just need to add a !loose_route() in
> my if block when I want to account for INVITE and ACK request ?
>
> Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 12:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
>
>
>> That's because the other call is put on hold and an INVITE is sent with
>> 0.0.0.0 as IP address to indicate that.
>> Such INVITEs will be loose_route'd in your script, so don't account
>> INVITEs that go through loose route logic.
>> g-)
>>
>> inge wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've got a problem with call waiting function. This one allow us to hang
>>> out a call when we are already in communication.
>>>
>>> But when I press "R" on my phone to take the second call, there is
one
>>> INVITE and one ACK generated by the proxy and being accounted in MySQL.
>>>
>>> It's the same when I switch between both callers. So I can have for the
>>> same callid 2 3 4...X INVITE ACK and one BYE. So in SERWeb for example,
>>> I can see for one call 3 lines of accounting.
>>>
>>> Thanks for you support.
>>>
>>> Adrien .L
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Serusers mailing list
>>> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
14 May
14 May
10:35 a.m.
Okay, thanks for your support. I will introduce this new condition for
accounting soon.
Le samedi 12 mai 2007 à 09:52 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
No, that should do it.
Unless the in-call INVITEs don't have Route headers. Then you have a
buggy UA...
g-)
inge wrote:
> Hmm, but I account before if (loose_route()).
>
> So I do :
>
> if (method=="BYE || ... && !loose_route())
> setflag(1);
> };
>
> Can I do an other thing ?
>
> Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 14:55 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
>
> > No, you have to make sure that INVITEs that go into your if
> > (loose_route()) { ... } don't get accounted.
> > g-)
> >
> > inge wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for your answer.
> > > I use accounting in route{}. So I just need to add a !loose_route() in
> > > my if block when I want to account for INVITE and ACK request ?
> > >
> > > Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 12:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
> > >
> > >
> > > > That's because the other call is put on hold and an INVITE is
sent with
> > > > 0.0.0.0 as IP address to indicate that.
> > > > Such INVITEs will be loose_route'd in your script, so don't
account
> > > > INVITEs that go through loose route logic.
> > > > g-)
> > > >
> > > > inge wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I've got a problem with call waiting function. This one
allow us to hang
> > > > > out a call when we are already in communication.
> > > > >
> > > > > But when I press "R" on my phone to take the second
call, there is one
> > > > > INVITE and one ACK generated by the proxy and being accounted in
MySQL.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's the same when I switch between both callers. So I can
have for the
> > > > > same callid 2 3 4...X INVITE ACK and one BYE. So in SERWeb for
example,
> > > > > I can see for one call 3 lines of accounting.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for you support.
> > > > >
> > > > > Adrien .L
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Serusers mailing list
> > > > > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> > > > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
16 May
16 May
11:28 a.m.
I back to this problem because I highlight a side effect.
In fact, I with this kind of condition for accounting : if
(method=="BYE" || method =="CANCEL" || ((method=="ACK" ||
method=="INVITE) && !loose_route())) { setflag(1) }
I don't account the calls for call forwarding.
Any idea ?
Le lundi 14 mai 2007 à 09:35 +0200, inge a écrit :
Okay, thanks for your support. I will introduce this
new condition for
accounting soon.
Le samedi 12 mai 2007 à 09:52 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
No, that should do it.
Unless the in-call INVITEs don't have Route headers. Then you have a
buggy UA...
g-)
inge wrote:
> Hmm, but I account before if (loose_route()).
>
> So I do :
>
> if (method=="BYE || ... && !loose_route())
> setflag(1);
> };
>
> Can I do an other thing ?
>
> Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 14:55 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
>
> > No, you have to make sure that INVITEs that go into your if
> > (loose_route()) { ... } don't get accounted.
> > g-)
> >
> > inge wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for your answer.
> > > I use accounting in route{}. So I just need to add a !loose_route() in
> > > my if block when I want to account for INVITE and ACK request ?
> > >
> > > Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 12:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
> > >
> > >
> > > > That's because the other call is put on hold and an INVITE is
sent with
> > > > 0.0.0.0 as IP address to indicate that.
> > > > Such INVITEs will be loose_route'd in your script, so don't
account
> > > > INVITEs that go through loose route logic.
> > > > g-)
> > > >
> > > > inge wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I've got a problem with call waiting function. This one
allow us to hang
> > > > > out a call when we are already in communication.
> > > > >
> > > > > But when I press "R" on my phone to take the second
call, there is one
> > > > > INVITE and one ACK generated by the proxy and being accounted in
MySQL.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's the same when I switch between both callers. So I can
have for the
> > > > > same callid 2 3 4...X INVITE ACK and one BYE. So in SERWeb for
example,
> > > > > I can see for one call 3 lines of accounting.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for you support.
> > > > >
> > > > > Adrien .L
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Serusers mailing list
> > > > > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> > > > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
22 May
22 May
8:06 a.m.
Well, call forwarding is always a special case because you need to get
the billing right according to how your billing app needs it. Look at
the INVITE that comes for call forwarding and test for it in your script.
g-)
inge wrote:
I back to this problem because I highlight a side
effect.
In fact, I with this kind of condition for accounting : if
(method=="BYE" || method =="CANCEL" || ((method=="ACK" ||
method=="INVITE) && !loose_route())) { setflag(1) }
I don't account the calls for call forwarding.
Any idea ?
Le lundi 14 mai 2007 à 09:35 +0200, inge a écrit :
Okay, thanks for your support. I will introduce
this new condition for
accounting soon.
Le samedi 12 mai 2007 à 09:52 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
No, that should do it.
Unless the in-call INVITEs don't have Route headers. Then you have a
buggy UA...
g-)
inge wrote:
> Hmm, but I account before if (loose_route()).
>
> So I do :
>
> if (method=="BYE || ... && !loose_route())
> setflag(1);
> };
>
> Can I do an other thing ?
>
> Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 14:55 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
>
>
>> No, you have to make sure that INVITEs that go into your if
>> (loose_route()) { ... } don't get accounted.
>> g-)
>>
>> inge wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Thanks for your answer.
>>> I use accounting in route{}. So I just need to add a !loose_route() in
>>> my if block when I want to account for INVITE and ACK request ?
>>>
>>> Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 12:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> That's because the other call is put on hold and an INVITE is sent
with
>>>> 0.0.0.0 as IP address to indicate that.
>>>> Such INVITEs will be loose_route'd in your script, so don't
account
>>>> INVITEs that go through loose route logic.
>>>> g-)
>>>>
>>>> inge wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've got a problem with call waiting function. This one allow us
to hang
>>>>> out a call when we are already in communication.
>>>>>
>>>>> But when I press "R" on my phone to take the second call,
there is one
>>>>> INVITE and one ACK generated by the proxy and being accounted in
MySQL.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the same when I switch between both callers. So I can have
for the
>>>>> same callid 2 3 4...X INVITE ACK and one BYE. So in SERWeb for
example,
>>>>> I can see for one call 3 lines of accounting.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for you support.
>>>>>
>>>>> Adrien .L
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Serusers mailing list
>>>>> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
>>>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
11 Jun
11 Jun
1:23 p.m.
Hi Greger,
Thanks for you answer and sorry for mine, I was away from my office
since some days.
In fact, it's a very special case. But finally I can see the forward
with i_uri and o_uri in my acc table. So I just have to add a plugin in
my script for use i_uri and o_uri instead of sip_from/to according to
some rules.
Regards
Le mardi 22 mai 2007 à 07:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
Well, call forwarding is always a special case because
you need to get
the billing right according to how your billing app needs it. Look at
the INVITE that comes for call forwarding and test for it in your
script.
13 Jun
13 Jun
2:28 a.m.
Not only billing part, but for caller id also. The final destination should
see the right caller id (Original call generator).
Can you please share where I can find such a plugin. I have been looking for
something like that.
Thank you,
-Jai
On 6/11/07, inge <inge(a)legos.fr> wrote:
Hi Greger,
Thanks for you answer and sorry for mine, I was away from my office
since some days.
In fact, it's a very special case. But finally I can see the forward
with i_uri and o_uri in my acc table. So I just have to add a plugin in
my script for use i_uri and o_uri instead of sip_from/to according to
some rules.
Regards
Le mardi 22 mai 2007 à 07:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
Well, call forwarding is always a special case
because you need to get
the billing right according to how your billing app needs it. Look at
the INVITE that comes for call forwarding and test for it in your
script.
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
15 Jun
15 Jun
10:50 a.m.
Hi Jai,
I don't have problems with caller ID. In a case of CFNA/CFB or CFU, I
see on the terminal the right caller id.
I think thanks to unchange sip_from/sip_to URI, wich were use for
signalisation maybe.
Le mardi 12 juin 2007 à 16:28 -0700, Jai Rangi a écrit :
Not only billing part, but for caller id also. The
final destination
should see the right caller id (Original call generator).
Can you please share where I can find such a plugin. I have been
looking for something like that.
Thank you,
-Jai
On 6/11/07, inge <inge(a)legos.fr> wrote:
Hi Greger,
Thanks for you answer and sorry for mine, I was away from my
office
since some days.
In fact, it's a very special case. But finally I can see the
forward
with i_uri and o_uri in my acc table. So I just have to add a
plugin in
my script for use i_uri and o_uri instead of sip_from/to
according to
some rules.
Regards
Le mardi 22 mai 2007 à 07:06 +0200, Greger V. Teigre a écrit :
Well, call forwarding is always a special case
because you
need to get
the billing right according to how your billing
app needs
it. Look at
the INVITE that comes for call forwarding and
test for it in
your
script.
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
6370
days inactive
6406
days old
11 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Greger V. Teigre -
inge -
Jai Rangi