[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0014683]: Hangup cause 18 (no user response) is an end user condition and should not be used for protocol timeouts

[Asterisk Bug Tracker]

The following issue has been set as RELATED TO issue 0014684. 
====================================================================== 
http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=14683 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                davidw
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   14683
Category:                   Channels/chan_sip/Interoperability
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   minor
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     new
Asterisk Version:           1.6.0.1 
Regression:                 No 
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): N/A 
SVN Revision (number only!):  
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2009-03-17 07:25 CDT
Last Modified:              2009-03-17 15:39 CDT
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    Hangup cause 18 (no user response) is an end user
condition and should not be used for protocol timeouts
Description: 
We had a requirement for implementing failovers to alternative CCMs when
talking to Cisco and therefore decided we needed to determine which
failures implied a failure on a trunk that had failed since the last
qualify.  We decided to use ${HANGUPCAUSE} to refine the ${DIALSTATUS}
information.  Empirically, we found that we got 18 (no user response) when
we tripped a no response to our critical packet for the INVITE on the
trunk.

However, looking at the description of this condition, and, in particular
looking at the definition used in
<http://www.quintum.com/support/xplatform/network/Q931_Disconnect_Cause_Code_List.pdf>,
it seems to me that this cause code is intended for end user no answer
oonditions, particularly where it is either known that the the user wasn't
made aware of the call, or that it is not absolutely certain that they were
made aware.  In particular, it looks like this is the default choice for
end use no answer, with 19 only being used if it was certain they were
alerted.

It seems to me that 102 (recovery on timer expired) is probably more
appropriate. 
======================================================================
Relationships       ID      Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------------
related to          0014684 Hangup cause 20 (subscriber absent), cl...
====================================================================== 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2009-03-17 15:39 tilghman       Relationship added       related to 0014684  
======================================================================