[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0018611]: inband DTMF cannot be detected and trigger service execute when A and B both use u-law (the same codec)

[Asterisk Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=18611 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                shihchuan
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   18611
Category:                   Core/RTP
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   minor
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     acknowledged
Asterisk Version:           1.8.1.1 
JIRA:                       SWP-2962 
Regression:                 No 
Reviewboard Link:            
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): N/A 
SVN Revision (number only!):  
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2011-01-13 05:04 CST
Last Modified:              2011-02-11 09:59 CST
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    inband DTMF cannot be detected and trigger service
execute when A and B both use u-law (the same codec)
Description: 
1. A and B both use the same codec (u-law, a-law).
When A enter *96(transfer feature key), transfer service don't be executed
but B hear dtmf tone.

2. If A and B use different codec.(A use u-law, B use a-law) 
When A enter *96(transfer feature key), transfer sevice is executed.

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0131857) remiq (reporter) - 2011-02-11 09:59
 https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=18611#c131857 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
I am also experiencing this problem.  I am able to reproduce this in 1.6.1
and 1.6.2. 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2011-02-11 09:59 remiq          Note Added: 0131857                          
======================================================================