[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0011643]: Allow for the conditional logging of CDRs based on call disposition

[noreply at bugs.digium.com]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=11643 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                kratzers
Assigned To:                murf
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   11643
Category:                   CDR/NewFeature
Reproducibility:            N/A
Severity:                   feature
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     assigned
Asterisk Version:           SVN 
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases):  trunk 
SVN Revision (number only!): 94974 
Disclaimer on File?:        N/A 
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             12-27-2007 13:52 CST
Last Modified:              04-30-2008 09:39 CDT
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    Allow for the conditional logging of CDRs based on
call disposition
Description: 
In our setting, we've found it desirable to log CDRs conditionally based on
the call disposition. For instance, only log CDRs for calls that were
either answered or not answered. Attached is a patch which allows users to
specify the dispositions to log using a mask (inverse) such as
NOANSWER|ANSWERED. The default is to log everything:
FAILED|BUSY|NOANSWER|ANSWERED.

Note: This serves a different purpose than "unanswered" and, for this
purpose, is much more granular.
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 kratzers - 04-30-08 09:39  
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
That's fine. Though I do think it's backwards to generate unwanted data
that will have to be sifted through later. It's like not using an RBL
because you use SPAM filtering software or not blocking a DDoS at the edge
of a network because you're running a firewall on the end system. Feel free
to close this issue. 

Issue History 
Date Modified   Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
04-30-08 09:39  kratzers       Note Added: 0086199                          
======================================================================