[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0014321]: [patch] The contact exten field in the sip.conf register string is not parsed

[Asterisk Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=14321 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                Nick_Lewis
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   14321
Category:                   Channels/chan_sip/General
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   major
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     confirmed
Asterisk Version:           1.6.0 
Regression:                 No 
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): N/A 
SVN Revision (number only!):  
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2009-01-23 07:58 CST
Last Modified:              2009-01-28 07:10 CST
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    [patch] The contact exten field in the sip.conf
register string is not parsed
Description: 
The contact exten field for all registrations is set to "s" irrespective of
the value of the contact exten parameter in the register string.

This problem was first mentioned in note 97149 of issue 14185. I think
that the patches that address the primary problem with expiry in issue
14185 also address this contact exten issue. However if a separate patch is
needed for this alone then I can make one.
======================================================================
Relationships       ID      Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------------
child of            0014185 [patch] Setting registration expiry in ...
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0098952) Nick_Lewis (reporter) - 2009-01-28 07:10
 http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=14321#c98952 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Sorry to cause more confusion

If 14185 is applied first then it should not be necessary to apply this
patch since 14185 is a superset of 14321.

The reason I raised this issue separately was because there was some
uncertainty whether 14185 would be applied 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2009-01-28 07:10 Nick_Lewis     Note Added: 0098952                          
======================================================================