|Summary:||ASTERISK-01298: libpri does not support "SDN Marking"|
|Date Opened:||2004-03-26 07:00:23.000-0600||Date Closed:||2011-06-07 14:04:59|
|Environment:||Attachments:||( 0) libpri.patch|
( 1) pri_q931.patch
( 2) q931.patch
|Description:||SDN Marking is required on some PRI's to do outbound dialing. AT&T uses the Network Specific Facility information element to mark calls as SDN. This would also support Megacomm using the same ie number with a different NSF code.|
****** ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ******
I've implemented this in the libpri source code, but I had to make it a mandatory ie. That would break libpri for other users, so I'm mainly asking how I need to pass flags into libpri for things like these where it is an ISDN option provided by the telco.
|Comments:||By: Brian West (bkw918) 2004-03-26 17:03:29.000-0600|
ifdef it so if people want it they can define that. Modify the makefile to include such options. That sounds most logical. Post a diff and we can all look and see how the best way to do it.
By: mschaefe (mschaefe) 2004-03-26 22:44:04.000-0600
Is there a better way than Makefile to make it configurable on a per-PRI basis? I am using Asterisk as a switch to front some devices that expect PRI signalling. I'm not sure I want to make it a mandatory ie because I may want to front simpler PRI devices (e.g. a Dialogic Card) which does not support the feature. If I add NSF to the list of mandatory ie's, libpri will reject any calls that don't have the ie, right? I'm going to work on it a bit tomorrow and hopefully submit a patch.
By: mschaefe (mschaefe) 2004-03-31 17:47:54.000-0600
Sorry about the complexity of the patch. I've been working on both 1306 and 1307 and solved them both. 1307 is due to a switch to Codeset 6 being sent over the PRI. That ie is ignored, but the next IE is Change Status, and that causes Asterisk to reject the SETUP - not sure why that code exists. We'll definitely need to discuss this patch. FYI: I'm pursuing the disclaimer through our legal staff. Should be no big issues.
By: twisted (twisted) 2004-04-29 09:28:25
any update on this? disclaimer? has the code been ifdef'd?
By: mschaefe (mschaefe) 2004-04-30 10:41:45
It's not going to be an easy process to get the code disclaimed. I can walk you through my final solution so that it's "your" code. I ended up making it a configuration option in zaptel.conf because it is a feature that is enabled on some PRI's and disabled on other PRI's. I wanted to support outbound dialing on lineside T1's and didn't want to have to configure them to dial SDN.
There's really no reason to ifdef the code since it's a PRI option and it implements an existing ie that libpri doesn't recognize.
By: Brian West (bkw918) 2004-04-30 12:55:50
Is your company just not wanting to disclaim the fixes? Or do they not understand the whole open source stuff?
By: mschaefe (mschaefe) 2004-05-03 10:04:22
In a large company it's always much easier to say "no" than to say "yes."
By: Brian West (bkw918) 2004-05-05 01:34:09
hehe I understand :)
By: Mark Spencer (markster) 2004-05-21 02:01:37
If we can't get the code disclaimed we mind as well close it out.
By: mschaefe (mschaefe) 2004-05-21 07:36:01
I'm going to implement the code at home on my own time with my own resources based on the AT&T spec and then I can disclaim the code myself. Please delete the patches, since they are not disclaimed.
By: twisted (twisted) 2004-05-21 09:49:51
Actually, I'm gonna do one better. Feel free to post back here and re-open this bug once you get things done at home, or, file a new bug when you're ready to impliment this.