Anyway, loopback channel in FS is completely unusable, so we do need to have some best practices on how to do things without it in FS wiki... Maybe I have time and will describe our experience soon.

2012/6/4 Michael Collins <msc@freeswitch.org>

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Avi Marcus <avi@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@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@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@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@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@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@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

_________________________________________________________________________
Professional FreeSWITCH Consulting Services:
consulting@freeswitch.org
http://www.freeswitchsolutions.com

FreeSWITCH-powered IP PBX: The CudaTel Communication Server
http://www.cudatel.com

Official FreeSWITCH Sites
http://www.freeswitch.org
http://wiki.freeswitch.org
http://www.cluecon.com

Join Us At ClueCon - Aug 7-9, 2012

FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org

--
Best regards,

Dmitry Sytchev,
IT Engineer