Who knows. I have asked why they are backwards when it comes to the RFC's. -Dale On Jul 16, 2009, at 10:41 AM, Ken Rice wrote:
That's just right down screwing with the standards...
PAID is the caller id... This particular definition is from the RFCs and 3GPP docs for IMS which is why we have standardized P- headers...
Can your vendor not look at the P-Charging-Vector field?
Also, From when used with PAID is more like an ANI not a CLID
From: Dale <fdhege@gmail.com> Reply-To: <freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org> Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:30:34 -0400 To: <freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org> Subject: [Freeswitch-users] Setting P-Asserted-ID to something other than the callerid
Hello again,
I wanted to first say thanks to Brain for helping me fix my from domain issue the other day. It helped quite a bit.
Now with more testing and talking with the vendor (please don't shoot the messenger :) )
They want the caller id info in the from and the charge number/ screening number in the P-Asserted-ID.
I have tested this and verified that this does work like they say it does by setting the callerid number to my charge number and setting the from user in the gateway config to the callerid I want displayed. But this solution doesn't scale very well.
I know I can set the gateway option caller-id-in-from to get that part done. But is there a way to set the P-Asserted-ID to something other than the callerid?
Any hints would be welcomed.
Thanks,
-Dale
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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