P-Asserted-Identity transparency between leg A and leg B
Hello, In the scenario where the From is different than the P-Asserted-Identity on leg A, FS put the PAI in the From on leg B. I don't find how to change this behaviour. I would like to keep the From and the P-Asserted-Identity as they come on the leg A except some manipulations. Someone knows which parameters must be changed? Currently, the leg B is configured with "pass-callee-id" to false, "caller-id-in-from" to true and "caller-id-type" to "pid". Regards, Igor.
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 06:01:02PM +0100, igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
In the scenario where the From is different than the P-Asserted-Identity on leg A, FS put the PAI in the From on leg B.
I don't find how to change this behaviour. I would like to keep the From and the P-Asserted-Identity as they come on the leg A except some manipulations.
Someone knows which parameters must be changed? Currently, the leg B is configured with "pass-callee-id" to false, "caller-id-in-from" to true and "caller-id-type" to "pid".
Hello Igor, Thanks for posting this. I find this an interesting question, too. I use this currently on the leg to my local phone and ATA: <extension name="cli-handling" continue="true"> <condition> <action application="export" data="_nolocal_origination_caller_id_name=_undef_"/> <action application="export" data="_nolocal_origination_caller_id_number=${sip_from_user}"/> <action application="export" data="_nolocal_sip_cid_type=none"/> </condition> </extension> When there is a "clip no screening" call coming my way, I also get both numbers, the calling party in PAI and the generic number in From, from the provider. I didn't bother looking further into this because I actually don't know which number the phone/ATA would display if they received both numbers. Maybe they are not aware of "clip no screening", which wouldn't be a surprise because this feature is not supported in all countries (I think in the US they don't support it). Kind regards, Seb
Hello Sebastian, In your case the local phone/ATA is the leg B right? With that settings you get transparency between the two legs? How ${sip_from_user} is defined? Regards, Igor. -----Message d'origine----- De : Sebastian Kemper <sebastian_ml@gmx.net> Envoyé : jeudi 6 décembre 2018 10:41 À : FreeSWITCH Users Help <freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org> Cc : igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com Objet : Re: [Freeswitch-users] P-Asserted-Identity transparency between leg A and leg B On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 06:01:02PM +0100, igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
In the scenario where the From is different than the P-Asserted-Identity on leg A, FS put the PAI in the From on leg B.
I don't find how to change this behaviour. I would like to keep the From and the P-Asserted-Identity as they come on the leg A except some manipulations.
Someone knows which parameters must be changed? Currently, the leg B is configured with "pass-callee-id" to false, "caller-id-in-from" to true and "caller-id-type" to "pid".
Hello Igor, Thanks for posting this. I find this an interesting question, too. I use this currently on the leg to my local phone and ATA: <extension name="cli-handling" continue="true"> <condition> <action application="export" data="_nolocal_origination_caller_id_name=_undef_"/> <action application="export" data="_nolocal_origination_caller_id_number=${sip_from_user}"/> <action application="export" data="_nolocal_sip_cid_type=none"/> </condition> </extension> When there is a "clip no screening" call coming my way, I also get both numbers, the calling party in PAI and the generic number in From, from the provider. I didn't bother looking further into this because I actually don't know which number the phone/ATA would display if they received both numbers. Maybe they are not aware of "clip no screening", which wouldn't be a surprise because this feature is not supported in all countries (I think in the US they don't support it). Kind regards, Seb
Am December 6, 2018 11:25:33 AM UTC schrieb igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com:
Hello Sebastian,
In your case the local phone/ATA is the leg B right? With that settings you get transparency between the two legs? How ${sip_from_user} is defined? Hello Igor,
Phone/ATA are B leg. I don't get transparency with this. Transparency would be if I sent PAI untouched to B leg and the From would have the same user as in A leg. I only get the From user from A leg to B leg this way, the PAI is completely dropped. Which is no problem for my situation. I'm not sure if my workaround is also suitable for anonymous calls by the way. I'll try that out next week. Kind regards, Seb
Oh, I forgot. ${sip_from_user} is a channel var. I found it in the CDRs. I think it's also mentioned on the wiki.
Removing the caller id _name_ is just a personal preference of mine, btw.
participants (2)
-
igor.potjevlesch＠gmail.com
-
Sebastian Kemper