[Freeswitch-users] att_xfer and loopback

[Michael Collins]

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Avi Marcus <avi at avimarcus.net> wrote:

> I know you can do anything in the dialstring. But intended feature is to
> allow the user to do an attended transfer to any number that they could
> reach via the default calling. The default outbound path already has a LOT
> of stuff set up and it would be impossible to duplicate that within a
> SINGLE dialstring in a function call.
> What is needed is for an att_xfer to be able to have leg C hit the
> dialplan and bridged however a "normal" leg B to that number would be
> called.
> Does this make sense?
>
Perhaps, but I remain unconvinced that this scenario is impossible without
loopback. How about the OP actually supply a sample Lua script and dialplan
and call log? I'd be willing to wager that the gurus could come up with a
non-evil alternative that actually works. Just because loopback seems like
a clean solution doesn't necessarily mean that it is. I'll leave it to
Anthony to give the technical reasons why loopback doesn't always work as
one would expect or why it should be avoided wherever possible.

-MC


> -Avi
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Michael Collins <msc at freeswitch.org>wrote:
>
>> Au contraire mon frere!
>>
>> You can do multiple things in a dialstring, like setting channel
>> variables. You can also use execute_on_ring/media/answer to execute the
>> extension with doing all the loopback overhead.
>>
>> I propose an experiment: provide a dialplan and loopback dialstring and
>> we'll see if we can't give you a non-loopbackish alternative.
>>
>> -MC
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Avi Marcus <avi at avimarcus.net> wrote:
>>
>>> ... all the normal dialplan handling. Setting CID, options, LCR stuff,
>>> billing controls.
>>> -Avi
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 11:40 PM, Michael Collins <msc at freeswitch.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let me rephrase...
>>>>
>>>> Since loopback is generally evil and should be avoided wherever
>>>> possible, what does loopback give you that you can't get from doing a
>>>> normal dialstring?
>>>> -MC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Avi Marcus <avi at avimarcus.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ... because att_xfer seems to require a "sofia/$profile/$destination"
>>>>> directive, and he just wants the call to hit the dialplan.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Avi
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Michael Collins <msc at freeswitch.org>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Why do you need to use loopback at all?
>>>>>> -MC
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 3:17 AM, Alex Lake <alex at digitalmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Got a lua script for a B-party "mid-call menu". Is it legitimate to
>>>>>>> do..
>>>>>>> "session:execute("att_xfer", "loopback/"..destnum)"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've tried it and it seems to start off doing the right things, but
>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>> A-party gets disconnected as soon as the call to the C-Party (the
>>>>>>> person
>>>>>>> I'm transferring the call to) answers the call.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe better to try to orchestrate the entire affair from within the
>>>>>>> lua
>>>>>>> script? (Tricky for a beginner like me!)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Alex
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20120603/d4f8c54a/attachment.html