[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0015057]: [patch] hints with 2+ devices that include ONHOLD are often set wrong

[Asterisk Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=15057 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                p_lindheimer
Assigned To:                dvossel
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   15057
Category:                   Core/PBX
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   minor
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     ready for testing
Asterisk Version:           1.4.21.1 
Regression:                 No 
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): N/A 
SVN Revision (number only!):  
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2009-05-07 21:25 CDT
Last Modified:              2009-05-27 10:58 CDT
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    [patch] hints with 2+ devices that include ONHOLD
are often set wrong
Description: 
I brought this up in the dev mailing list, the crux of the issue is:

If you have a hint with two (or more) devices or a device and a custom
devstate that includes ONHOLD, you get unexpected results. Two examples:

exten => 222,hint,SIP/222&SIP/211
exten => 333,hint,Custom:DND333&SIP/333

The following results are inconsistent as they should all return ONHOLD:

ONHOLD & IDLE = IDLE
ONHOLD & UNAVAILABLE => UNAVAILABLE
ONHOLD & UNKNOWN => IDLE
ONHOLD & INVALID => IDLE

Per Russell Bryant's response on the mailing list:

"I would agree that this is a bug.  I would expect that combination of  
states to result in an OnHold state."


====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0105539) p_lindheimer (reporter) - 2009-05-27 10:58
 https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=15057#c105539 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
There were some issues pointed out in the review which uncovered some more
in further testing, so attaching two new patches that should now exhibit
the following behavior:

BUSY & ONHOLD => BUSY
INUSE & ONHOLD => INUSE
ONHOLD & RINGING => RINGINUSE

this opens up a question, should the last return RINGINUSE or is a new
state required to return RINGONHOLD? (and if we have ONHOLD&RINGING&INUSE
do we return all three?)

My opinion would be RINGINUSE is appropriate... 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2009-05-27 10:58 p_lindheimer   Note Added: 0105539                          
======================================================================