<div>On 20 January 2013 00:06, Mario G <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mario_fs@mgtech.com" target="_blank">mario_fs@mgtech.com</a>></span> wrote:</div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0px;font:normal normal normal 11px/normal Menlo;color:rgb(42,126,49)">I never did this so I must be missing something, I tried both below but the bridge then fails. Can anyone shed some light on what I am doing wrong. My ITSP now supports in-reply-to so I can pass the caller ID to a forwarded call from FS.</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>In-Reply-To should contain a Call-ID not a caller ID. They are very different.<div><br></div><div>The following would make a bit more sense, but still not a lot:</div><div><br></div>
<div><action application="set" data="sip_rh_In-Reply-To=${sip_call_id}"/><br><br>Using In-Reply-To in a response doesn't seem right to me. I would expect it to appear in an INVITE. For for example, you get a missed call and you call the person back, then the INVITE for the callback would have a new Call-ID but the original Call-ID in the In-Reply-To header. That said, I have no idea what your ITSPs intended use for the header is. </div>
</div><div><br></div><div>Richard</div></div></div>